Allowed

Sidheshwar @ Chhotu v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC16 Dec 2022/15183/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the accused-applicant Sidheshwar @ Chhotu in a murder case, releasing him on a personal bond and two sureties based on the parity with a co-accused who had already been granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Release of the accused-applicant Sidheshwar @ Chhotu on personal bond and two sureties with conditions regarding attendance and conduct.

Sidheshwar @ Chhotu Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15183 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Sidheshwar @ Chhotu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kumar,Murli Manohar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶6

The present application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking bail in FIR/Case Crime No.145 of 2021, under Sections 302, 379 and 411 IPC, Police Station Khairabad, District Sitapur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that coaccused, Amit @ Kallu having similar role, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 12.10.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.15278 of 2021. He, therefore, prays that accused-applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity.

¶8

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but not disputed the aforesaid facts.

¶9

Considering the fact that co-accused, having similar role, has been granted bail by this Court, it would be appropriate to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail.

¶10

Let applicant Sidheshwar @ Chhotu be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence

¶12

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.

¶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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶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. 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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

Order Date :- 16.12.2022 Rao/-

¶17

Digitally signed by CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO Date: 2022.12.16 18:19:45 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sidheshwar @ Chhotu v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sidheshwar @ Chhotu v. State of U.P. Thru. 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

Diwakar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Superintendnet of Police Central Bureau

Awadh Nishad S/O Bhagau Nishad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Ram Dulare Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow

Pankaj Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Gautam Vs State of U.P. Thru Addl Chief Secy Home Lko

Bablu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.