Allowed

Dinesh v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC18 Oct 2022/11900/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under the Wildlife Protection Act and Forest Act, the court released the applicant on bail after finding no cogent evidence to connect him to the offense, despite allegations of possession of a pig tusk.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding presence in court and coaching.

Dinesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11900 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Dinesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Piyush Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

Instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Range Case No.8/202223, under Sections 9, 27, 29, 39, 44, 51(1C) Indian Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 & 41,42 Indian Forest Act, 1927, Police Station- Range Suzauli, District Bahraich.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the instant case. He next added that there is no cogent piece of evidence to connect the applicant in the instant matter. It has been alleged that one pig tusk has been recovered from the possession of the applicant but the same could not be substantiated by any evidence. He added that the present applicant is local resident and he was not involved in such kind of offence. He further submits that there is no previous criminal antecedent of the applicant which has been explained in para 14 of the bail application. The applicant is law abiding citizen and he is languishing in jail since 14.08.2022. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶9

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State vehemently opposed the contention aforesaid and submits that there are strong evidence against the applicant to involved in the aforesaid offence and as such he is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it is evident that the applicant is local resident; as per assertion of the counsel for the applicant, there is no cogent piece of evidence to connect the applicant in the instant matter, there is no previous criminal antecedent and he is languishing in jail since 14.08.2022.

¶11

Thus, considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail.

¶12

Let the applicant- Dinesh involved in the aforementioned 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, with the following conditions:-

¶13

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶14

(2) 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. He 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;

¶15

(3) 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.; and

¶16

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

¶17

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶18

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶19

Order Date :- 18.10.2022 A.Kr*

¶20

Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR Date: 2022.10.19 11:00:52 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dinesh v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

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

Prem Lata Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Tarun Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Vikas Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Ajaz Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Smt. Gaytri Shukla Vs State of U..P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Nitendra Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.