Shahab Anwar Siddiqui Vs State of U.P.

In Chamber

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51008 of 2019

Applicant :- Shahab Anwar Siddiqui Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mukhtar Alam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar Tripathi,Vinod Kumar Tripathi

¶4

Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

¶5

This bail application has been taken up during lock-down period as an urgent one.

¶6

Counter and rejoinder affidavits filed by both the parties are taken on record.

¶7

Perused the records.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Shahab Anwar Siddiqui , with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 268 of 2015, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 409 I.P.C., Police Station- Syohara, DistrictBijnor, during pendency of trial.

¶9

It is stated in the affidavit filed along with this bail application that the applicant is the victim of politics prevailing between two groups of institution and only to harass the applicant, FIR has been lodged. He has successfully completed his service and retired from the post of Head Clerk on 31.07.2014 and FIR has been lodged with a delay of one year after his retirement. It is further stated that now investigating officer has submitted charge sheet and applicant is no more required for investigation. Neither, he can influence the witness nor tamper the evidence. It is also stated in the affidavit that trial is still pending and there is no hope of early completion of trial. In the counter affidavit filed by State as well as informant, there is no reference of any previous criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is aged bout 65 years and he is in jail since 13.09.2019.

¶10

By filing counter affidavit, State as well as counsel for the informant has opposed the bail, but could not dispute the said fact.

¶11

Considering the material on record as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , larger mandate of Article 21 of the constitution of India, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail subject to the following conditions :-

¶12

1.Considering the special circumstances of the lock-down prevailing in the district concerned presently and in the light of the directions of this Court in PIL No. 564 of 2020 dated 06.04.2020, let the applicant be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond only to the satisfaction of the jail authorities, where the applicant is languishing. It is further directed that within period of four weeks from the date of lifting of the complete lock-down in the district concerned resulting in resumption of normal functioning of the Courts in that district, the applicant shall furnish two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned alongwith certified copy of this order, failing which the bail granted by this Court shall stand cancelled necessitating surrender of the applicant.

¶13

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

¶14

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.

¶15

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶16

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶17

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶18

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;

¶19

In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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 Code.

¶20

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

¶21

Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶22

In case the applicant has been enlarged on short term bail as per the order of committee constituted under the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court his bail shall be effective after the period of short term bail comes to an end.

¶23

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶24

Order Date :- 23.4.2020 Arvind

Shahab Anwar Siddiqui v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahab Anwar Siddiqui v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nakul Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Bittu @ Arun Vs State of U.P.

Prabal Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Pancham Gaurh Vs State of U.P

Maksood Khan Vs State of U.P.