Allowed

Ranjeet Kanjad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Sept 2021BAIL/16819/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted bail to a criminal applicant falsely implicated and awaiting trial, relying on principles of Article 21 and a Supreme Court precedent regarding jail overcrowding, emphasizing the reformative theory of punishment.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail under Sections 272, 273 IPC and section 60(1), 60(2) Excise Act, subject to attendance and non-tampering conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16819 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Ranjeet Kanjad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bindu Kumari,Ashok Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA, appearing for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶7

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to malafide intention. There is no independent witness of the alleged incident. It is further submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant and a false recovery has been shown from the possession of the applicant, which is planted. Till date no chemical report was come on record to show the liquor is adulterated. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 04.03.2021. Criminal history of the applicant has been duly explained in paragraph no. 2 of the supplementary affidavit.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer.

¶9

Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.

¶10

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶11

Let applicant- Ranjeet Kanjad , be released on bail in Case Crime No. 105 of 2021, under Sections- 272, 273 IPC and section 60(1), 60(2) Excise Act, Police Station- Robertsganj, District- Sonbhadra, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, if not wanted in any other case, subject to following conditions:-

¶12

The applicant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶13

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶14

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶15

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶16

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 1.9.2021 Arti

Ranjeet Kanjad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjeet Kanjad 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Istekar Vs State of U.P.

Salman and Another Vs State of U.P.

Diwakar Bahera Vs State of U.P.

Lallan Prasad Singh @ L.P. Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Lallan Prasad Singh @ L.P. Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anil Kumar Gupta @ Anil Kumar Vs State of U.P.