Allowed

Balveer v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Apr 2022BAIL/15658/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an appeal against bail rejection, the High Court found merit in the applicant's claim of false implication and lack of independent recovery. The court allowed the bail application, releasing the applicant on personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below.

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

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15658 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Balveer Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 0047 of 2022 at Police Station Sasni Kotwali, District Hathras under Sections 5/25 Arms Act. The applicant is in jail since 13.02.2022.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Hathras, on 03.03.2022.

¶7

Shri Arvind Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. One country made weapon and other implements like hammers and some tools has been shown as recovered from the applicant. Recovered items were planted on the applicant to frame him in the instant case to show proficiency of the police investigators. Recovered articles are not used in manufacture of arms. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. Prosecution evidence does not connect the applicant with the offence. Learned counsel for the applicants has explained the criminal history of the applicants and contend that the same have no bearing on the instant case.

¶8

Shri Anupam Anand, learned brief holder for the State could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Learned brief holder does not contest the criminal history of the applicant as disclosed in the bail application.

¶9

I see merit in the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and accordingly hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶10

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant- Balveer be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶12

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶13

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶14

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶15

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶17

Order Date :- 13.4.2022 Pravin

¶18

Digitally signed by PRAVIN VERMA Date: 2022.04.18 11:27:30 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Balveer v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balveer 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

Rashid Vs State of U.P.

Ravindra Vs State of U.P.

Rakib Vs State of U.P.

Rihan Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Afsaar Alias Afsar Vs State of U.P.

Raju Yadav @ Raju Mota @ Raju Kantewala Vs State of U.P.