Allowed

Annuj Kumar @ Anna v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Jun 2021BAIL/18020/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judge court allowed a bail application filed by Annuj Kumar in Case Crime No. 163 of 2020 under the Arms Act, noting false recovery allegations and prior bail history, subjecting him to a six-month bond and strict trial attendance conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions regarding adjournments, presence, and potential consequences of breach.

Annuj Kumar @ Anna Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18020 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Annuj Kumar @ Anna Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Awadh Mishra,Siddhartha Mishra

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶6

This matter is listed for hearing through video conferencing. Link has been sent to the respective learned counsels. Learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State are connected through the link.

¶7

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

¶8

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 163 of 2020, under Sections 3/25 Arms Act, police station Behsuma, District Meerut is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶9

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in the present case showing false recovery of a Tamancha and a revolver from the possession of the applicant. There is no independent witness of the said recovery. In fact no such recovery was made either from the possession of the applicant or on his pointing out. Except the present case the applicant has a criminal history of six cases and in all the said cases, the applicant has been released on bail by the competent court, the said fact has been mentioned in para-9 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. The applicant is in jail since 20.08.2020.

¶10

Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail and has pointed out that though it has been mentioned in para-9 of the affidavit that the applicant has been granted bail by the competent court in all the six cases but no bail order has been annexed with the present bail application to which learned counsel for the made a statement at Bar that in all the six cases the applicant has been granted bail by the competent court.

¶11

Taking into account the statement made at Bar by learned counsel for the applicant and keeping in view the nature of the

¶12

offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.

¶13

Let the applicant Annuj Kumar @ Anna, who is involved in Case Crime No. 163 of 2020, under Sections 3/25 Arms Act, police station Behsuma, District Meerut 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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE

¶19

EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.

¶20

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

¶21

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 testimony of the witnesses.

¶22

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad. The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned. 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. Order Date :- 4.6.2021 Shiraz

Annuj Kumar @ Anna v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Annuj Kumar @ Anna 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

Ramvaran Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Indrajeet Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh and Another Vs State of U.P.

Anurag Mishra @ Kapil Vs State of U.P. and Another

Akash Vs State of U.P.

Amit Vs State of U.P.