Allowed

Bilal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Apr 2020BAIL/5028/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application concerns the grant of bail to the applicant Bilal in a cow slaughter case under the Cow Slaughter Act. The court allowed bail subject to stringent conditions including personal bond, sureties, and strict adherence to court dates, including compliance with Court directions regarding Covid lockdown impediments for furnishing sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions including undertaking not to seek adjournments and adhere to trial dates.

Bilal Vs State of U.P. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

In Chamber

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5028 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Bilal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sayeed Saif Ullah,Sufia Saba Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶5

This bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.148 of 2014, under Section 3/5/8 of Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station Mirzapur, District Saharanpur, during pendency of trial.

¶6

As per the version made in the First Information Report the concerned Sub Inspector upon receiving information with regard to cow slaughter came to the house of one Imran where it was found that the applicant was also present and was holding a knife which the applicant threw and escaped from the spot. Beef was found on the spot and applicant has been implicated in the aforesaid criminal case.

¶7

The applicant has applied for bail on the ground that main accused Imran has already been bailed out by this Court vide order dated 28.7.2015 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.7114 of 2015, which is Annexure-2 to this bail application. It is submitted that the gravity of applicant's offence is not greater than what is attributed to Imran, who has already been granted bail. The applicant is languishing in jail since 4.12.2019 and in case he is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

No objection has been filed on behalf of the State.

¶9

Perused the record and rejection order passed by the court below.

¶10

Let the applicant Bilal involved in the instant case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶12

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

(iii) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal

¶14

Code.

¶15

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶16

(v) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶17

(vi) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶18

(vii) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶19

In view of the extraordinary situation prevailing in the State due to Covid19, the directions of this Court dated 6.4.2020 passed in Public Interest Litigation No. 564 of 2020 (In re vs. State of U.P.), shall also be complied.

¶20

The order reads thus:

¶21

"Looking to impediments in arranging sureties because of lockdown, while invoking powers under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, we deem it appropriate to order that all the accused-applicants whose bail applications came to be allowed on or after 15th March, 2020 but have not been released due to non-availability of sureties as a consequence to lockdown may be released on executing personal bond as ordered by the Court or to the satisfaction of the jail authorities where such accused is imprisoned, provided the accused-applicants undertakes to furnish required sureties within a period of one month from the date of his/her actual release."

¶22

Order Date :- 17.4.2020 Ashok Kr.

Bilal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bilal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammad Usman Vs State of U.P.

Shyamveer Vs State of U.P.

Sajid Vs State of U.P.

Satvir and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.

Pramod Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Ravi Shankar Verma Vs State of U.P.