Allowed

Umesh Chandra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Dec 2021BAIL/41794/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court (Court No. 51) disposed of Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 41794 of 2021 filed by Umesh Chandra. Considering the nature of evidence and lack of tampering risk, the court allowed bail subject to strict conditions regarding attendance, adjournments, and non-intimidation of witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount, subject to imposed conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41794 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Umesh Chandra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satish Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sunil Kumar Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 306 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 307 IPC, registered at Police Station Bewar, District Mainpuri, during pendency of trial.

¶7

As per prosecution case, eight nominated persons are said to have looted Rs.20,000/-; role assigned to the applicant is of causing firearm injury by a country made pistol; no injury was caused; incident is of 3.8.2021 at about 3:15 P.M. in afternoon, whereas, F.I.R. was lodged on 5.8.2021 at about 22:41 hours; no plausible explanation has been furnished for the delayed F.I.R.; applicant is having one case, in which, police has filed final report; applicant is languishing in jail since 10.08.2021. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him.

¶8

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail, however, does not dispute the fact.

¶9

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Let the applicant- Umesh Chandra , 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:-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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

¶13

Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶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 :- 21.12.2021 Mukesh Kr.

Umesh Chandra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umesh Chandra 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

Kuldeep Kumar Vs Union of India

Guljar Vs State of U.P.

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

Mohd. Waseem and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.

Anwar Alias Annu Vs State of U.P.

Ankur Vs State of U.P.