Allowed

Bheem Arakh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Feb 2021BAIL/4904/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant, a co-accused in a loot case, subject to standard conditions including furnishing sureties, ensuring presence in court, and prohibiting tampering with evidence or witnesses. The court noted the applicant's criminal history but allowed bail on a personal bond.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on a personal bond and two sureties with conditions to appear in court and not tamper with evidence.

Bheem Arakh Vs State of U.P. — Arbitration | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4904 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Bheem Arakh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Dwivedi 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 available 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.91 of 2018, under Sections 395, 397, 412 I.P.C. and section 15 D.A.A. Act, Police Station G.R.P. Manikpur, District Chitrakoot.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that as per FIR on 2.10.2018, 15-16 persons committed loot of jewelries and money in Coach No.S-5 of Ganga Caveri train. On protest also they caused injuries by knife. He further submits that on 12.9.2018, five persons were arrested by the police, who have been granted bail by co-ordinate Benches of this Court in Criminal Misc.Bail Application Nos.956/19 and 13083/19, vide orders dated 23.1.2019 and 30.3.2019, respectively. Applicant's case is at par with co-accused released on bail. He further submits that the applicant has criminal history of five cases, which has been explained in paras 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is languishing in jail since 12.9.2018.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail, but does not dispute the factual aspects of the matter.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, enlargement of co-accused on bail, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant Bheem Arakh involved in the 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 will not tamper with the evidence and pressurize the witnesses during trial.

¶11

(ii) 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

(iii) 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.

¶13

(iv) 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, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(v) 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.

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 17.2.2021

¶18

m.a.

Bheem Arakh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bheem Arakh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vinod Bharti @ Vinod Gautam Vs State of U.P.

Gajodhar Vs State of U.P.

Ashwani Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Ranjeet @ Munna Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Vs State of U.P.

Ashish Gupta Vs State of U.P.