Allowed

Anish v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 May 2022BAIL/11370/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 394 and 411 IPC, the High Court of Allahabad, Mathura (via Court No. 78) granted bail to the applicant, Anish, noting the absence of an FSL report regarding the weapon and pending identification, while fixing standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions of appearing in court and not influencing witnesses.

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

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11370 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Anish Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed in the Court today is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 757 of 2020, under Sections-394 & 411 I.P.C., Police Station-Badaut, District Baghpat.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that accused-applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant case. It is submitted that the applicant is in jail since 18.09.2020 and the possibility of conclusion of trial is extremely bleak. In this case, the charge sheet has already been filed before the Court concerned and in this view of the matter, the applicant is not in a position to tamper with the evidence available on record or to influence the witnesses of the prosecution.

¶8

Further submitted that the FIR in issue was lodged against unknown persons. The case of the prosecution indicated in the FIR is to the effect that three persons lotted E-Rikshaw of the injured and caused injury with the knife. It is submitted that it appears that during investigation E-Rikshaw was found and to show the good work the Police of the concerned Police Station has roped the applicant in the present case and from the possession of the applicant the prosecution has shown recovery of E-Rikshaw and on pointing out of the applicant the prosecution has also shown recovery of Knife alleged to have been used in the crime. It is submitted that except this case there is no case pending against the applicant. This fact has not been disputed by the learned AGA.

¶9

Further submission is that there is no FSL report to support the story of the prosecution so far as it relates to the Knife in issue is concerned. Also stated that till date the identification, as required under the law, has also not been carried out by the prosecution. In these circumstances of the case, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, he may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Learned A.G.A., on the basis of instructions received, opposed the prayer for

¶12

grant of bail. However, he could not dispute the aforesaid facts of the case.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in mind the period of incarceration as also the fact that identification has not been carried out by the prosecution and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶14

Let applicant- Anish be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond to the satisfaction of the court concerned forthwith. Applicant is also directed to furnish two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶15

(1) Applicant will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.

¶16

(2) Applicant will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court.

¶17

(3) Applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶18

(4) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶19

(5) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶20

(6) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶21

Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.

¶22

Order Date :- 19.5.2022 Vinay/-

¶23

Digitally signed by VINAY KUMAR Date: 2022.05.19 13:36:30 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anish v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anish 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rohit Alias Lala Vs State of U.P.

Lekhraj Singh and Another Vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Pal and Another Vs State of U.P. and another

Raj Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Aniket Tiwari @ Chhotu Vs State of U.P.

Sonu @ Sunil Kushwaha Vs State of U.P.