Allowed

Khursheed @ Vakeel v. State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC14 Jul 2022/2618/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail to the applicant in a case involving manufacturing of country-made pistols and cartridges. Relying on Article 21 and the Dataram Singh precedent, the court exercised discretion to grant bail subject to specific conditions regarding court appearances and prohibiting misuse of liberty.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions of appearance and conduct.

Khursheed @ Vakeel Vs State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. Home Lko. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2618 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Khursheed @ Vakeel Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sukh Deo Singh,Lalji Yadav,Paritosh Shukla

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Lalji Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 659 of 2021 U/Ss 307 I.P.C. and 3/25 of the Arms Act, Police Station Lalganj District Pratapgarh, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

As per prosecution story, some unknown persons are said to have been involved in the manufacturing of some country made pistols and two CMPs 32 bore, five used cartridges and three live cartridges of 32 bore along with one cartridge of 9mm are said to have been recovered by the police.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. He submitted that it is a no injury police party firing case and the applicant is not even named in the FIR. His name has come up later on in the investigation. The criminal history of eight cases assigned to the applicant have been explained in paragraph 24 of the rejoinder affidavit. The applicant is languishing in jail since 17.10.2021. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but he could not dispute the fact that the criminal history of the applicant has been explained;

¶11

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail

¶12

application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant- Khursheed @ Vakeel, 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.

¶14

(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 and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

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

¶19

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.

¶20

Order Date :- 14.7.2022 Anurag, APS

¶21

Digitally signed by ANURAG SINGH Date: 2022.07.19 15:18:53 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Khursheed @ Vakeel v. State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khursheed @ Vakeel v. State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. Home Lko.

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

Pramod Kumar Dubey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Chotelal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secrty. Home and Another

Vinod Tiwari and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Chandra Mohan Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow

Bhrigu Nath Verma (B.N. Verma) Vs State of U.P Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Khuddan @ Subhash Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Seyc. Home Lko.