Allowed

Safeeq and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Jun 2021BAIL/22348/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed the bail application of Safeeq and Salees accused under the Cow Slaughter Act and IPC. The court directed their release on personal bonds with conditions to ensure attendance and cooperation, while also invoking the relief from Public Interest Litigation No. 564 of 2020 to permit release during lockdown without immediate sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bonds with two sureties each (or personal bond alone due to order date restrictions) complying with subsequent appearing conditions and P.I.L. relief.

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

¶1

Court No. - 2

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22348 of 2021 Applicant :- Safeeq and another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Yadvendra Mani Mishra, Sanjay Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶5

As per prosecution case, nine persons are seen on the spot; 120 kg of cow meat was recovered. It is urged by learned counsel for the applicants that no arrest was made from the spot; applicants are father and son; they have no criminal antecedents and have been falsely implicated; no recovery has been made from the applicants. It is further submitted that the applicants are languishing in jail since 08.04.2021, there is no likelihood of early disposal of trial and the applicants undertake that if enlarged on bail, they will never misuse liberty and will cooperate in the trial.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶7

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶8

Let the applicants Safeeq and Salees, involved in Case Crime No. 7 of 2021, under Sections 3/5/8 Cow Slaughter Act and Sections 269, 270 and 429 I.P.C., Police Station Jaswant Nagar, District Etawah be released on bail on their furnishing personal bonds with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶9

(i) The applicants shall file undertakings to the effect that they 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.

¶10

(ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal

¶11

Code.

¶12

(iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

(iv) The applicants 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 them in accordance with law.

¶14

(v) The party shall file computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶15

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

¶16

(vii) 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.

¶17

In view of the extraordinary situation prevailing in the State due to Covid-19, the directions of this Court dated 6.4.2020 passed in Public Interest Litigation No. 564 of 2020 (In re vs. State of U.P.), shall also be complied.

¶18

The order reads thus:

¶19

"Looking to impediments in arranging sureties because of lockdown, while invoking powers under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, we deem it appropriate to order that all the accused-applicants whose bail applications came to be allowed on or after 15th March, 2020 but have not been released due to non-availability of sureties as a consequence to lockdown may be released on executing personal bond as ordered by the Court or to the satisfaction of the jail authorities where such accused is imprisoned, provided the accusedapplicants undertakes to furnish required sureties within a period of one month from the date of his/her actual release."

¶20

Order Date :- 14.6.2021 P. Sri.

¶21

Digitally signed by Justice Suneet Kumar Date: 2021.06.14 14:22:03 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Safeeq and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Safeeq and Another 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Krishna Prakash Pati Tripathi Vs Sri Vinay Kumar Pandey, Director of Education

Smt Asha Vs Dr Anil Kumar Singh, Director Local Bodies

Moti Lal Vs Sri H.C. Awasthi, D.G.P. and 2 Others

Shyamveer Singh Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Kabutra Vs State of U.P.

Kale Vs State of U.P.