Allowed

Prem Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Dec 2021BAIL/38521/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed the bail application of Prem Singh in an Arms Act case. Rejecting the impugned order of the Additional Sessions Judge, the court held that the applicant was falsely implicated and granted bail citing jail overcrowding during the pandemic.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in like amount subject to conditions not to tamper with evidence, influence witnesses, and appear before trial court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38521 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Prem Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sandhya Singh,Kapil Kumar,Shyam Babu Vaish Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Shyam Babu Vaish, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State. None appears on behalf of the informant.

¶6

A first information report was lodged as Case Crime No.460 of 2021 at Police Station-Khurja Dehat, District-Bulandshahr under Sections 5/25 of Arms Act.

¶7

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr, on 26.08.2021.

¶8

The applicant is in jail since 28.07.2021 pursuant to the said F.I.R.

¶9

Shri Shyam Babu Vaish, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. Firearms were planted on the applicant to frame him in the instant case to show proficiency of police investigators. There is no independent witness or public witness to the alleged recovery. Learned counsel for the applicant has explained the criminal history of the applicant and

¶10

further contends that the applicant has become a soft target for the police authorities who repeatedly nominate him in a number of cases only to burnish their professional credentials. The aforesaid cases do not have any bearing on the instant case. Learned counsel for the applicant claims congruency in role with coaccused person and seeks parity in relief with coaccused namely Firoz, who has been granted bail by the this Court on 02.12.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 40998 of 2021. Lastly it is contended by the learned counsel for applicant that the applicant shall not abscond and will fully cooperate in the criminal law proceedings. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.

¶11

Shri I. P. Srivastava, learned A.G.A could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Learned AGA does not contest the criminal history of the applicant as disclosed in the bail application.

¶12

Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.

¶13

I see merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for

¶14

the applicant and hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶15

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶16

Let the applicant- Prem Singh involved in Case Crime No.460 of 2021 at Police Station-Khurja Dehat, District-Bulandshahr under Sections 5/25 of Arms Act, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶17

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶18

The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶19

The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶20

The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶22

Order Date :- 9.12.2021

¶23

Dhananjai

Prem Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prem 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pawan @ Lali and Another Vs State of U.P.

Prem Singh Vs State of U.P.

Sachin Alias Sonu Gainda Vs State of U.P.

Ravi @ Thakur Kol Vs State of U.P.

Aditya Sonkar Vs State of U.P.

Sohan Lal Malhotra Vs State of U.P.