Allowed

Jhuman Shah v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Aug 2022BAIL/11691/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11691 of 2021, the High Court released the applicant on bail in a prosecution for Sections 307 IPC offences. The order imposed strict conditions regarding court attendance and conduct while noting the lack of clear evidence of murderous intent.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, and specific undertakings regarding court attendance and no tampering with evidence.

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

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11691 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Jhuman Shah Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Binod Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, 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, Jhuman Shah, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 261 of 2020, under Sections 307 I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali Dehat, DistrictEtah, pendency of trial.

¶7

There is allegation of recovery of illicit arms from the applicant. Firing by the applicant and other co-accused on police party is also alleged.

¶8

The implication of applicant is under Section 307 I.P.C. Injury has been suffered by one police personnel on his right arm which is not the vital part. Causing injury or not causing the same is not relevant. Intention to cause the murder is relevant. Intention of the applicant was only to evade arrest by the police and he fired only to frighten the police. For implication under Section 307 I.P.C., intention forms necessary ingredient of offence in any particular case. It necessarily precedes the act and should be discernible from the allegations on record, which is lacking in this case. The recovery alleged is planted. The applicant is languishing in jail since 16.07.2020. He has criminal history of 12 cases explained in the afÏdavit filed in support of the bail application and the supplementary afÏdavit. In case he is enlarged 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 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 sufÏcient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iv) 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 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 sufÏcient 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 :- 6.8.2022 KS

¶19

Digitally signed by KISHAN SINHA Date: 2022.08.10 10:05:42 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jhuman Shah v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jhuman Shah 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akeel @ Sannu Vs State of U.P.

Pankaj Bahal Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home at Lucknow

Dhanman Bind Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suresh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Gucchan Vs State of U.P.

Rinku Kumar Vs State of U.P.