Allowed

Akhlakh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Mar 2021BAIL/6079/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6079 of 2021, the Court enlarged the applicant, Akhlakh, on bail for offences under various sections of the IPC. The order did not express an opinion on the merits of the case but relied on Article 21 and a larger mandate case law.

What did the court decide?

Enlargement of Akhlakh on bail by executing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6079 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Akhlakh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Pandey,Satish Trivedi (Senior Adv.),Sheshadri Trivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dharmendra Pratap Singh,Markanday Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Satish Trivedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Sheshadri Trivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dharmendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the complainant, 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 informant as well as all injured persons in their statements has admitted this fact that they are aggressor of the incident. In fact, in the statement, informant stated that earlier informant Inam was beaten by other side. Thereafter, informant and alongwith his supporters went to residence of Zahid son of Munshi and abused the co-accused Kamil and others. Thereafter, applicant and co-accused assaulted by them by wood sticks and illegal weapons. The similar statements have also been given by all injured persons. It is further submitted that even otherwise, if the treating the statements of informant as well as injured persons is correct, it is only a case of self defence and nothing else. It is also submitted that co-accused Taseem has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 17.3.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5536 of 2021. Applicant is having criminal history of certain cases, which are explained in the affidavit. He is languishing in jail since 20.11.2020 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶7

Sri Dharmendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the statements of injured persons as well as complainants.

¶8

Considering the material on record as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , larger mandate of

¶9

Article 21 of the Constitution of India, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, let the applicant- Akhlakh , involved in Case Crime No. 467 of 2020, under Sections- 147, 148, 149, 452, 307, 506 IPC, Police Station- Kairana, DistrictShamli, be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶10

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court, Allahabad. The concerned Court/Authority/Jail 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.

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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;

¶16

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.

¶17

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.

¶18

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.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 17.3.2021 Junaid

¶21

Digitally signed by Justice Neeraj Tiwari Date: 2021.03.17 17:42:35 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Akhlakh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akhlakh 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

Farman Vs State of U.P.

Zunaid Vs State of U.P.

Vikas Vs State of U.P.

Taseem Vs State of U.P.

Rizwan @ Bhoora Vs State of U.P.

Sarvej Vs State of U.P.