Allowed

Aslam v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Jan 2021BAIL/47436/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to the applicant Aslam in a criminal case under Sections 147, 387, 506 IPC. The court acknowledged that co-accused were granted bail and noted the applicant has been in jail since April 2019. The applicant was released on a personal bond and two sureties with strict conditions to ensure presence and non-interference.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant Aslam on bail on personal bond and two local sureties subject to specific undertaking conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47436 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Aslam Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- B.N.Singh,Manish Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vivek Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicant, which is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.320 of 2017, under Sections 147, 387, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Jalaun, District Jalaun.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per F.I.R. version applicant along with four co-accused came and demanded Rs.5,000/- from the informat, otherwise he will falsely implicated in a case. He further submits that on 26.04.2017 co-accused Santosh Barar has lodged an F.I.R. Case Crime No.0261 of 2017, under Sections 147, 387, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1) (10) SC/ST Act against informant and others thereafter, in counter blast the present F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicant and others. He submits that co-accused Santosh Kumar, Sntosh Barar and Ram Singh have been already granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 14.02.2020, 29.01.2020 and 03.09.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.1247 of 2020, 4270 of 2020 and 24640 of 2020, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. 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 the applicant is languishing in jail since 04.04.2019.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties,

¶11

enlargement of co-accused on bail, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Aslam 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 :-

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶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

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

¶17

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.

¶18

Order Date :- 13.1.2021 Jitendra

Aslam v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aslam 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rohit Gill Vs State of U.P.

Dr. Satyaveer Singh Pindey Vs State of U.P.

Chandra Kishor Shashtri Vs State of U.P.

Amit Vs State of U.P.

Shiv Narayan Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Yadav Alias Sonu Vs State of U.P.