Allowed

Saleem v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Jul 2022BAIL/16723/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court entertained a bail application filed by Saleem in a case concerning the recovery of beef under the C.S. Act. The court granted bail without expressing an opinion on the merits, imposing conditions regarding witness tampering and court attendance.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant Saleem on bail with a personal bond and two local sureties, subject to specific conditions of conduct and attendance.

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

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16723 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Saleem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Zakir Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.119 of 2022, under Section 3/5/8 C.S. Act, P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District Bulandshahr.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per FIR, from the joint possession of the applicant and co-accused Imran 70 Kg. beef was recovered on 03.03.2022. He further submits that co-accused Imran has been enlarged on bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 16304 of 2022 vide order dated 12.05.2022, therefore, on the ground of parity he is entitled for bail. He also submits that the applicant has criminal history of 08 minor cases, in which he has been enlarged on bail, which is explained in para 2 of the supplementary affidavit. He next submits that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is languishing in jail since 03.03.2022.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by submitting that applicant has criminal history of 08 cases, therefore, he is not entitled for bail.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, enlargement of co-accused on bail and perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant Saleem involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶10

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. 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 treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶11

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

¶12

(iii) 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.

¶13

(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 him in accordance with law.

¶14

Order Date :- 14.7.2022 MAA/-

¶15

Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD AZAD ANSARI Date: 2022.07.15 14:20:32 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Saleem v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saleem 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

Ram Narayan Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Satendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Kallu Vs State of U.P.

Talib Vs State of U. P. thr. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. of U. P. at Luck

Shivam Jaiswal Vs State of U.P.

Dinesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.