Allowed

Monu@ Saurabh Kushwaha and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Dec 2021BAIL/39700/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application concerns applicants charged under Sections 147, 308, 323, 504, 506 IPC. The single bench found that the applicants had made out a prima facie case for bail due to lack of prior record and severity of injury not specifying an author. Bail with sureties was granted subject to strict conditions regarding court presence, no adjournments, warning against witness intimidation under

What did the court decide?

Release of applicants on personal bond and two sureties each upon furnishing an undertaking to appear, avoid adjournments, and refrain from intimidating witnesses, subject to specific conditions under

Monu@ Saurabh Kushwaha and Another Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39700 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Monu@ Saurabh Kushwaha And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Datta Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants involved in Case Crime No. 48 of 2021, under Sections 147, 308, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. P.S. Tiwaripur, District Gorakhpur.

¶7

It is urged that co-accused Gaurav Kushwaha has been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.12.2021, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 39424 of 2021, and Vijay Kushwaha has been enlarged on bail by the court below vide order dated 13.08.2021. As per prosecution case, four nominated and 6-8 unknown persons are said to have caused assault; general allegations has been made against the assailants; there is single head injury; author of the injury has not been specified; applicants are languishing in jail since 13.7.2021, having no criminal antecedent and in case they are enlarged on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶8

Learned Additional Government Advocate opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicants.

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail.

¶10

Let the applicants- Monu alias Saurabh Kushwaha and Sandeep Kushwaha, be released on bail in the above case on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶11

(i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

(iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in

¶14

order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(iv) The applicants 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 applicants 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 them in accordance with law.

¶16

However, It is made clear that in case the applicants indulge in intimidating or threatening any witness, the State or Prosecutor would be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.

¶17

Order Date :- 20.12.2021 Mukesh Kr.

Monu@ Saurabh Kushwaha and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Monu@ Saurabh Kushwaha and Another 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

M/S Manish Engineering Enterprises Thru Prop. Vs Indian Farmers Fertilizer Coop. Ltd. Thru M.D. and Ors.

Santosh Srivastava Vs State of U.P.

Mamta Katheria Vs State of U.P.

Kuldeep Kumar Vs Union of India

Guljar Vs State of U.P.

Mithilesh Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P.