Allowed

Shiv Pratap v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Jan 2021BAIL/44035/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Uttar Pradesh granted bail to the applicant, Shiv Pratap, in a criminal case under Sections 392 and 411 IPC involving loot and recovery of a pistol. Bail was subject to conditions regarding attendance, no tampering with evidence, and risk of proclamation.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions of future conduct and court attendance.

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

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44035 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Shiv Pratap Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 657 of 2020, under Sections 392, 411 IPC, Police Station Chiluwatal, District Gorakhpur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is not named in the FIR. He submits that according to the prosecution version on 11th September, 2019 Rs. 93,372, one tablet of samsung and one mobile phone were looted by three persons. It is alleged that Rs. 18,500/- and one country-made pistol were recovered from the possession of applicant. He further submits that on 18th September, 2020 father of the applicant withdrew Rs. 40,000/-, the money recovered was his own money that is why he has falsely been implicated in the case. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that there is no criminal history of the applicant and he is languishing in jail since 19.09.2020

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submits that Rs. 18,500/- and one country-made pistol were recovered from the possession of applicant.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and also perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Shiv Pratap involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶10

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant 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.

¶11

(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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 4.1.2021 Israr

Shiv Pratap v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Pratap 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

Arun Kumar Rayakwar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suneel Vs State of U.P.

Amit Vs State of U.P. and Another

Santosh Tiwari Vs State of U.P.

Rashid Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Singh Vs State of U.P.