Allowed

Nadeem v. Union of India and 2 Others

Allahabad HC3 Aug 2021BAIL/17205/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application under Section 135 of the Customs Act, the High Court discharged the applicant by applying Section 436-A Cr.P.C. explicitly refraining from expressing an opinion on the merits of the case while imposing strict conditions to prevent tampering and ensuring presence in court.

What did the court decide?

The applicant-Nadeem be released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions regarding presence in court and non-interference.

Nadeem Vs Union of India and 2 Others — Customs and Excise | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17205 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Nadeem Opposite Party :- Union Of India And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shailesh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ramesh Chandra Shukla,G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. Nil of 2020 (Case No. 4037 of 2021), under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962, Police Station Custom Varanasi, District Varanasi.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that maximum punishment is provided 3 years and applicant is languishing in jail since 04.03.2020. 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 there is no criminal history of the applicant and he is languishing in jail since 24.01.2019.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as Sri Ramesh Chandra Shukla, learned counsel appeared on behalf of opposite party no. 1 & 2 has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by submitting that applicant smuggled prohibited item 699.800kg gold from Dubai to India.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and also perusing the material on record, detention period as well as Section 436-A Cr.P.C., without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Nadeem involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶10

(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

¶11

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.

¶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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶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. 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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 3.8.2021 Israr

Nadeem v. Union of India and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nadeem v. Union of India and 2 Others

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

Adesh Vikal Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Vs State of U.P.

Pramod Baghel Vs State of U.P.

Firoj Vs State of Up

Mohd. Zahid Vs State of U.P.

Mazid Vs State of u,p