Allowed

Yogesh @ Shashi Kant Tiwari v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Jan 2021BAIL/25082/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court decided a bail application filed by Yogesh @ Shashi Kant Tiwari. Adopting previous reasoning, the court enlarged the applicant on bail by imposing personal bond, sureties, and standard and emergency conditions due to court functioning issues.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions of attendance and undertakings.

Yogesh @ Shashi Kant Tiwari Vs State of U.P. — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25082 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Yogesh @ Shashi Kant Tiwari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vikas Tripathi,Imran Ullah Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vinod Kumar Shukla

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Imran Ullah, Advocated assisted by Sri Vikas Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vinod Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The applicant who is father-in-law facing incarceration since 05.05.2020

¶7

in connection with case crime no. 38 of 2020 under Sections 498A, 304B

¶8

IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Chauri, District Bhadohi.

¶9

Adopting the reasoning applied in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 21785 of 2020, let the applicant Yogesh @ Shashi Kant Tiwari in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 25082 of 2020, is also entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Let the applicant-Yogesh @ Shashi Kant Tiwari , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶11

(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT SHE 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.

¶12

(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

¶13

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HER 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 HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

¶14

(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON,

¶15

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 HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶16

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.

¶17

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

¶18

Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:

¶19

The applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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.

¶23

Order Date :- 8.1.2021 Abhishek Sri.

Yogesh @ Shashi Kant Tiwari v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogesh @ Shashi Kant Tiwari 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

Pappu and Another Vs State of U.P.

Surya Bhan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Vinod Vs State of Up

Ram Naresh Vs State of U.P.

Parmila Devi Vs State of U.P.

Sadhu and Another Vs State of U.P.