Allowed

Sandeep Samrath v. State of Up

Allahabad HC25 Jan 2021BAIL/49410/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Allahabad allowed a bail application filed by Sandeep Samrath in Case Crime No. 70 of 2020. Granting bail without expressing an opinion on the merits, the Court fixed conditions including furnishing personal and surety bonds and strict compliance with trial proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties of equal amount to the satisfaction of the court.

Sandeep Samrath Vs State of Up — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49410 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Sandeep Samrath Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bhanu Prakash Verma,Adarsh Verma 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.70 of 2020, under Sections 395, 398, 412, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Mathura.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to F.I.R. version on12.05.2020 Rs.21,07,127/- were looted from Bank Aryavrat, Damodarpura Sadar Bazar Mathura by four persons and after four months of the incident on 29.09.2020, four persons were arrested by the police. He further submits that false recovery of Rs.20,000/- has been shown from the possession of the applicant by police. Further submits that coaccused Rahul Tiwari @ Ravi Tiwari has been already granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.11.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.41828 of 2020, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 12 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application. 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 14.09.2020.

¶8

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

¶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, enlargement of co-accused on bail, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Sandeep Samrath involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his/her furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties

¶10

each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶11

(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.

¶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 Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶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 :- 25.1.2021 Jitendra

Sandeep Samrath v. State of Up

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Samrath v. State of Up

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

Siddharth Jain Vs State of U.P.

Salman @ Prince Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Jagdish Vs State of U.P.

Sachin Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aslam Khan @ Aslam Sadiq Rana Vs State of U.P.