Allowed

Sudama Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC30 Jul 2021BAIL/24153/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Sudama Chauhan in a case involving manufacturing fake sanitizer. The applicant sought release, arguing false implication. The court granted bail subject to conditions regarding witness protection and court attendance, observing without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions regarding witness interference and court appearance.

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

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24153 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Sudama Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Yash Chauhan,Ajay Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- 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.220 of 2021, under Sections 274, 275, 420, 467, 468 I.P.C., 18-A, 18-C, 27 of Drug and Cosmetic Act and Section 4 of Epidemic Act, P.S. Sigra, District Varanasi.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per F.I.R. version the applicant was filling fake sanitizer from a bottle to another. He further submits that the applicant is a labour of Ramashray Chauhan who is owner of Ram Flex company where manufacturing sanitizer. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. He has been falsely implicated in the present case being labour in the factory. 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 is languishing in jail since 08.05.2021.

¶8

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

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, nature of offence and punishment provide for the offence, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Sudama Chauhan 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

¶11

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.

¶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 :- 30.7.2021 Jitendra

¶18

Digitally signed by Justice Ali Zamin Date: 2021.08.03 17:32:33 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sudama Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudama Chauhan 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

Jitendra Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Chandra Jeet Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Pavitra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Kishan Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Pappu @ Ram Pratap and Another Vs State of U.P.

Raj Bahadur Vs State of U.P.