Allowed

Bheem @ Bheema v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Feb 2021BAIL/35145/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court, Allahabad allowed bail to Bheem @ Bheema, lodged in Tihar Jail since 2018, in an undertrial case involving IPC Sections 307, 323, 504, 304, subject to specific conditions regarding sureties and trial attendance.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail on a personal bond without sureties initially, with Sureties to be furnished within one month of normal court functioning.

Bheem @ Bheema Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35145 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Bheem @ Bheema Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pravin Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant today in the Court which is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Pravin Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶7

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no. 726 of 2015, under Sections 307, 323 504, 304 IPC, Police StationSurajpur, District-Gautam Budh Nagar is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial. The applicant is languishing in jail since 09.04.2018.

¶8

Contention raised by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is not named in the FIR. Hi name is figured up during investigation in the statement of one co-accused person, namely, Pramod, who has been bailed out by the coordinate Bench of this court in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 2388 of 2020 by order dated 02.05.2016. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the trial is progressing in snail speed.

¶9

Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

Keeping in view the period of incarceration undergone by the applicant and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicant-Bheem @ Bheema , 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:-

¶12

(i) THE APPLICANT/APPLICANTS SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE/THEY SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE FIXED FOR EVIDENCE WHEN THE WITNESSES IS/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.

¶13

(ii) THE APPLICANT/APPLICANTS SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER/THEIR COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE

¶14

TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIS/HER/THEIR UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

¶15

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT/APPLICANTS 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/APPLICANTS FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIS/HER/THEIR, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

¶16

(iv) THE APPLICANT/APPLICANTS 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/APPLICANTS IS/ARE 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 HIS/HER/THEIR IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶17

(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/APPLICANTS.

¶18

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

¶19

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/applicants to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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.

¶24

Order Date :- 3.2.2021

¶25

Abhishek Sri.

Bheem @ Bheema v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bheem @ Bheema 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

Jay Prakash Vs State of U.P.

Sukhlal Vs State of U.P.

Raja Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Kumari Alka Chaturvedi Vs State of U.P.

Ashok Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Vs State of U.P.