Allowed

Anurag Mishra @ Olanga v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secry. Home Lucknow

Allahabad HC19 Jan 2022/436/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed a bail application for Anurag Mishra involved in an attempt to murder case. The court found him fit for bail despite previous non-appearance due to livelihood reasons, provided co-accused were on bail, and imposed strict conditions to ensure attendance and prevent trial delays.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with strict conditions to attend all future court dates.

Anurag Mishra @ Olanga Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secry… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 436 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Anurag Mishra @ Olanga Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secry. Home Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Bhavana,Bajhul Quamar Siddiqui,Uttam Kumar Gond

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was enlarged on bail on 28.8.2010. Since then, he was regularly present before the trial court. However, on 8.7.2016, he could not remain present as he is a poor labourer and to earn his livelihood, he has to go out for work. Consequently, Non bailable warrant was issued against the applicant and he was arrested.

¶8

It is contended on behalf of the applicant that the co-accused Manmohan also could not appear before the trial Court. Thereafter, Non Bailable Warrant was also issued against him. He has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 10.12.2021 passed in Bail No.6087 of 2021.

¶9

It is submitted that since 2010 to 2016, not a single prosecution witness was examined by the prosecution. He is, in fact, not responsible for the delay.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that because of absence of the accused applicant, trial has been delayed.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, including the fact that the applicant was on bail and he had been regularly appearing in the trial court except on 8.7.2016, the co-accused Manmohan has been granted bail, he is in jail since 26.2.2021 after his arrest, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, I am prima facie satisfied that it is a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail and accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant Anurag Mishra alias Olanga, involved in Case Crime No.742 of 2009 under section 307 I.P.C., P.S. Shahabad, district Hardoi, 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 which are

¶13

being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

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

(2) 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

(3). 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 fail 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

(4) 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

Order Date :- 19.1.2022 kkb/

Anurag Mishra @ Olanga v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secry. Home Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anurag Mishra @ Olanga v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secry. Home Lucknow

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

Bulande Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home

Ashish Pathak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.,Home Deptt.,Lko

Rahmatullah @ Tullah Vs State of U.P.Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Deepu Saroj @ Dileep Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Nafees Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Prajpati Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.