Allowed

Tinku v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Jul 2021BAIL/8415/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single judges' order granting bail to an applicant under Section 439 Cr.P.C. during trial for offenses under the UP Gangsters Act. The court imposed strict personal attendance conditions and authorized trial court actions for absence or misuse of bail.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on personal bond and two sureties; strict conditions imposed regarding court attendance; breach grounds for cancellation.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8415 of 2021 Applicant :- Tinku Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶5

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 633 of 2020, under Section 2/3 of UP Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Bhogaon, District Mainpuri.

¶6

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further contended that only one case has been shown in the gang chart against the accused-applicant, in which the applicant is on bail. Copy of gang-chart and bail order have been annexed as Annexure Nos.2 and 3 respectively to the bail application. The applicant is in jail since 19.01.2021.

¶7

However, it was pointed out by learned AGA that applicant is having criminal history of six cases, which has been duly explained by the learned counsel for the applicant by way of filing supplementary affidavit. It is stated that out of the six cases, the applicant has been exonerated by the Investigating Officer in Case Crime Nos. 288 of 2018, Case Crime No. 520 of 2018 and Case Crime No. 521 of 2018 in rest of the two cases i.e. Case Crime Nos. 433 of 2019 and Case Crime No. 911 of 2018, the applicant has been released on bail, copies of the bail orders are annexed as Annexure SA-2 & 3 to the supplementary affidavit.

¶8

Learned AGA does not dispute the said fact. He submits that the investigation is now complete and the charge sheet has been filed.

¶9

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶10

Let the applicant- Tinku, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶11

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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

¶12

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 IPC.

¶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., may be issued and if 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 IPC.

¶15

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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

(v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.

¶17

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

¶18

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶19

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

¶20

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶21

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.

¶22

Order Date :- 16.7.2021/RavindraKSingh

Tinku v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tinku 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

Ramesh Vs State of U.P.

Najis @ Munna @ Mulla Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Sanawwar Jahan Vs State of U.P.

Karan @ Arjun Vs State of U.P.

Rai Singh @ Montu Lodhi Vs State of U.P.

Ramveer Chauhan Vs State of U.P.