Allowed

Sanju Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Aug 2021BAIL/15891/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving offenses under multiple sections of the IPC and the Criminal Law Amendment Act. The High Court Bench allowed bail after hearing counsel and submitting affidavits, subject to specific conditions regarding presence, tampering, and appearance in court proceedings, including an undertaking not to misuse bail.

What did the court decide?

Applicant to be released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each for an amount to the satisfaction of the trial court, subject to specific conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15891 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Sanju Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vidya Bhaskar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicant, which is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.682 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 336, 429, 504, 307 I.P.C. & 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, P.S. Jalalabad, District Shahjahanpur.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to F.I.R. version applicant fired over the son of the informant but the fire shot hit to the buffalow of Dalveer Singh, Rakesh and Sanju also fired over his son Rajveer on account of which Pankaj and Soni received injuries. He further submits that the co-accused Rakesh has been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.07.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.15593 of 2021, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 6 of the supplementary affidavit. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 18.11.2020.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, enlargement of co-accused on bail, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Sanju Singh involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local

¶11

sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶12

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant 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

(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.

¶14

(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 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

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

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 4.8.2021 Jitendra

Sanju Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanju 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

Shivam Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Yameen Vs State of U.P.

Nadeem Vs Union of India and 2 Others

Saurabh Vs State of Up

Ved Prakash Upadhyay Vs State of U.P.

Saddam Vs State of U.P.