Allowed

Induraja v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Apr 2021BAIL/13527/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 13527 of 2021 allowed. Justice Saral Srivastava held the applicant, Induraja, entitled to bail despite allegations of false implication. Conditional bail granted with specific undertakings regarding evidence tampering, court attendance, and proclamation compliance.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Induraja released on bail with personal bond and two reliable sureties subject to specific additional conditions for justice.

Induraja Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 5

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13527 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Induraja Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Piyush Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 0060 of 2020, under Section 2/3 of Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Talbehat, District Lalitpur with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶7

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that according to the gang chart, the applicant is said to have been involved in four criminal cases i.e. Case Crime No. 307 of 2019, Case Crime No. 4 of 2020, Case Crime No. 5 of 2020 and Case Crime No. 6 of 2020 in which he has already been enlarged on bail by the court concerned. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to police rivalry. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. The applicant is not a previous convict. The applicant is languishing in jail since 5.1.2020 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant, but could not point out anything material to the contrary.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶10

Let applicant Induraja be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶12

(ii) 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.

¶13

(iii) 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.

¶14

(iv) 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 Code.

¶15

(v) 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

(vi) In view of the fact that due to the pandemic of COVID-19, the certified copy is not being issued by the High Court, therefore, the order downloaded from the website duly certified by learned counsel for the applicant may be treated as true copy of the order and the Authority may not refuse to comply the order on the ground of non filing of certified copy of the order.

¶17

Order Date :- 7.4.2021 Jaswant

Induraja v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Induraja 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

Jamaluddin Khan and Others Vs Salim Ahemad Khan and Others

Huma Khan Vs Mohammad Aatif Beg

Mahesh Chandra Vs Jagan Nath and Others

Amit Rajpoot Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Vs State of U.P

Chhangur Yadav Vs State of U.P.