Allowed

Parasram v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Jan 2021BAIL/47812/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held Parasram, an applicant falsely implicated in an FIR under Sections 306 and 506 IPC, was released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties, subject to stringent conditions regarding trial attendance and non-interference with evidence.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Parasram Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47812 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Parasram Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satyvrat Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Katiyar, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is next submitted that relation between husband deceased and wife was not good and earlier daughter of the applicant was dislodged by the deceased and ultimately compromise took place between the parties on 17.8.2020. This fact may also be verified from Annexure-2 annexed alongwith affidavit to the bail application. It is further submitted that again daughter of applicant was tortured for dowry and FIR has been lodged by the wife on 21.10.2020. In fact, after the death of husband deacesed, family members do not want to give any share in property to his wife, thereafter, this frivolous FIR has been lodged. Applicant is having no criminal history. He is languishing in jail since 24.11.2020 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶7

Sri Sunil Katiyar, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶8

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, let the applicant Parasram , involved in Case Crime No. 589 of 2020, under Sections- 306, 506 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Mahoba, District- Mahoba be released on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned. It is further provided that this bail order available on the official website of the High Court will be taken to be the authentic one and certified copy shall be submitted before that court concerned as soon as it is issued.

¶9

This bail order would be subject to the fulfilment of following conditions:-

¶10

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶11

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶12

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶13

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

In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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

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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶16

In case the applicant has been enlarged on short term bail as per the order of committee constituted under the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court his bail shall be effective after the period of short term bail comes to an end.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 20.1.2021 Junaid

Parasram v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parasram 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

Salman Vs State of U.P.

Pintu Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Pinna @ Snil Mittal Vs State of U.P.

Satya Prakash Yadav Vs State of Up

Badshah Vs State of U.P.

Vijay Singh @ Pappe Vs State of U.P.