Allowed

Yasveer v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC26 Jul 2022BAIL/10841/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a bail application filed by the applicant, Yasveer, charged with dacoity under Section 399 IPC, directing his release on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to specific strict conditions regarding evidence tampering, court appearance, and absence during trial proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions regarding court appearance and committal.

Yasveer Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10841 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Yasveer Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Kamar Shah Alam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Yasveer, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.480 of 2021, under Sections 399 IPC, Police Station Tanda, District- Rampur, during pendency of trial.

¶7

There is allegation against nine named accused persons including the applicant regarding assembling for the purpose of committing dacoity.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of planted recovery by the police. Co-accused, Afzal, has been enlarged on bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.7887 of 2022 on 20.4.2022. The applicant has criminal history of seven cases explained in supplementary affidavit and he is languishing in jail since 24.12.2021. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 , and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid 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 that :-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶12

(ii) 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. 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

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. 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

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants 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.

¶15

(v) 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

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

¶17

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶18

Order Date :- 26.7.2022 Ruchi Agrahari

¶19

Digitally signed by RUCHI AGRAHARI Date: 2022.07.26 16:58:42 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Yasveer v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yasveer v. State of U.P.

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

Anish @ Bholu Vs State of U.P.

Jeut Rai Vs State of Up.

Daksh @ Darshan Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Kashyap Vs State of U.P.

Shakti Singh @ Monu Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ram Naresh Vs State of U.P.