Allowed

Tanjeem v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Sept 2022BAIL/13080/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Tanjeem in a case involving offences under Sections 307, 420, 467, 468, and 471 IPC. The Court found it to be a fit case for bail, ordering release on a personal bond and sureties subject to specific conditions regarding court attendance.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties.

Tanjeem Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13080 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Tanjeem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mukesh Joshi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.

¶5

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. 62/2013, under Sections 307, 420, 467, 468, 471, IPC, Police Station- Chatari, District - Bulandshahar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present crime. He further submits that the applicant is an illiterate person and due to mis-communication with the earlier counsel, he was not able to appear before the court below. He further submits that the applicant is booked in the offence which is triable by the Magistrate. It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, the applicant may flee from the course of law or may, otherwise, misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is in jail since 22.11.2021 and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is very bleak.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail, but he has not disputed the above contention made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant.

¶9

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 without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶10

Let applicant, namely, Tanjeem, be released on bail in the aforesaid Case Crime Number on furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that the applicant 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

¶12

treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶13

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. In case of absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against the applicant under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iii) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure the applicant's 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 the applicant, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(iv) 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 the applicant in accordance with law.

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 13.9.2022 Amit Mishra

¶18

(Piyush Agrawal,J.)

¶19

Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2022.09.13 13:34:58 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Tanjeem v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tanjeem 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

Indresh Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Rangnath Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home

Shivji Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Ang Pratap Bhan Singh @ Satendra Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P.

Haidar Vs State of U.P.

Angpratap Singh @ Satendra Vs State of U.P.