Allowed

Sandip Kumar Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Dec 2021BAIL/37182/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted interim bail to the applicant in a criminal trial involving alleged grievances and assault charges. The court imposed strict conditions regarding court attendance and trial conduct, emphasizing an independent trial thereafter.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties, subject to strict conditions regarding court attendance and trial conduct.

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

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37182 of 2021 Applicant :- Sandip Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Sharma,Monu Upadhyay,Raj Kishore Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶4

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 374 of 2021, under Sections 308, 323, 336, 427, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Deoria, District Deoria.

¶7

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that as per FIR version as well the statement of the injured specific role is assigned to co accused Manish Singh. It is further submitted that the incident took place on 5.7.2021 whereas the FIR was lodged on 8.7.2021. It is further submitted that as per medical report, there is single injury caused by hard and blunt object and the same is simple in nature. Applicant is in jail since 22.07.2021.

¶8

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposes the application for bail. He submits that the investigation is now complete and the charge sheet has been filed.

¶9

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶10

Let the applicant- Sandip Kumar Singh, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶11

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶13

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in

¶14

order to secure his 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 him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC.

¶15

(iv) The applicant 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 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.

¶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 of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶18

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶19

Order Date :- 4.12.2021/RavindraKSingh

Sandip Kumar Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandip Kumar 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

Jitendra Kumar @ Jeetu Kashyap Vs State of U.P.

Govind Ram @ Latoori Vs State of U.P.

Mohsin Alias Paua Vs State of U.P.

Sumit Narayan @ Tinku Vs State of U.P.

Nishant Vs State of U.P.

Jalil Khan @ Raja Vs State of U.P.