Allowed

Bhagvendra Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Jun 2021BAIL/11598/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail to the applicant in a criminal case under Section 392 IPC. The court found the case a fit one for bail after hearing counsel and perusing the record, subject to strict conditions regarding trial attendance and presence at specific proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, and undertaking to appear in court and avoid adjournments.

Bhagvendra Singh Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11598 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Bhagvendra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Lakshman Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant through video conferencing, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 397 of 2019, under Section 392 I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali Kalpi, District Jalaun is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶7

Submission made by learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the name of the applicant came in light in the extra judicial confession of Reghvendra @ Barri but only country made pistol was recovered from the possession of the applicant. Lastly, it is submitted that co-accused Ramu Singh has been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.12.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 46378 of 2020.The applicant is in jail since 22.11.2020 and the applicant undertakes that in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate in trial.

¶8

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposes the application for bail.

¶9

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶10

Let the applicant- Bhagvendra Singh , who is involved in aforementioned 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶11

(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE 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 IPC.

¶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., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF 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 IPC.

¶14

(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) 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.

¶15

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.

¶16

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

¶17

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the

¶18

testimony of the witnesses.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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.

¶22

Order Date :- 22.6.2021

¶23

Bhagvendra Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhagvendra Singh 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

Sarvesh Singh Vs State of U.P.

Anil Shukla Vs State of U.P.

Himanshu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gulabu Yadav@ Gulab Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Fursat Vs State of U.P.

Prashannjeet Vs State of U.P.