Allowed

Soran Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Jan 2021BAIL/34700/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was filed by Soran Singh challenging a criminal charge under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, and 471 IPC. The High Court granted bail, imposing strict conditions to prevent tampering with evidence and ensuring presence during trial proceedings, without explicitly expressing an opinion on the merits of the underlying charges.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on bail with personal bond and two local sureties subject to strict conditions regarding presence in court and non-tampering with evidence.

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

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34700 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Soran Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Dutta Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Raghvendra Kumar Mishra

¶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. 772 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Farah, District Mathura.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant by mortgaging the property obtained a loan of Rs. 5,50,000/- on 14th January, 2018 regarding which a Suit No. 253 of 2007 (Bhim Singh Vs. Soran Singh) was decided on 10th January, 2013 in favour of first informant. Appeal No. 52 of 2013 is pending before the District Judge, Mathura. It is alleged that during the pendency of appeal applicant took a loan. He submits that since appeal is admitted and title is still to be decided, therefore, he is not committed any offence. He further submits that informant also obtained a loan of Rs. 10,05,000/on 16th October, 2019. 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 19.08.2020.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submit that during pendency of the appeal without prior permission of the court concerned applicant took a loan and submits that a decree by the Civil Judge Senior Division was passed in favour of the informant, therefore, he is owner of the property and sale deed was also in his favour and applicant is not cooperative in deciding the appeal.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and

¶10

also perusing the material on record, pendency of the appeal, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Soran Singh 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 :-

¶11

(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 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 :- 6.1.2021/Israr

Soran Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Soran Singh 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

Saleem Vs State of U.P.

Farukh Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Kumar Patel @ Raj Kumar Patel Vs State of U.P.

Shahabuddin Vs State of U.P.

Santram Vs State of U.P.

Vishal @ Dabu Vs State of U.P.