Allowed

Basudev Goswami v. State of U.P. through Principal Secretary, Home, Lucknow

Allahabad HC17 Oct 2022/7734/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to the applicant in a criminal trial case involving multiple IPC charges. The order fixed conditions regarding witness tampering, court attendance, and consequences of breach, while explicitly reserving opinions on the case merits.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties under specified conditions prohibiting witness tampering and ensuring court attendance.

Basudev Goswami Vs State of U.P. through Principal… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7734 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Basudev Goswami Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Through Principal Secretary, Home, Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ramakar Shukla

¶4

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ramakar Shukla, learned counsel for the informant, Shri Ajay Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 762 of 2020, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, P.S.- Kotwali Nagar, District - Ayodhya.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. Several F.I.Rs. were registered against the applicant arising out of dispute with regard to a company. The applicant has explained his criminal history in para 15 of the bail application. The applicant is not involved in the alleged offence. He further added that the present applicant is aged about 72 years of age and he is languishing in jail since 21.8.2021. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Sri Ramakar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant vehemently opposed the aforesaid contention but could not dispute the fact that the similar set of fact, the FIRs lodged therein, the present applicant, has been enlarged on bail.

¶9

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 considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶10

Let the applicant Basudev Goswami involved in the

¶11

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:-

¶12

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

¶13

(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;

¶14

(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

¶15

(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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 17.10.2022 A.Kr*

¶19

Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR Date: 2022.10.19 09:49:39 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Basudev Goswami v. State of U.P. through Principal Secretary, Home, Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Basudev Goswami v. State of U.P. through Principal Secretary, Home, Lucknow

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

Ikram Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow

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

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

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.