Allowed

Arman Khan Alias Bhuttan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Oct 2022BAIL/23054/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 23054 of 2022, the High Court granted bail to the applicant in Case Crime No. 215/2016. The court noted that co-accused were already released and found it a fit case for bail without expressing an opinion on the merits of the charges.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of like amount subject to specific conditions.

Arman Khan Alias Bhuttan Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23054 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Arman Khan Alias Bhuttan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shree Prakash Upadhyay,Parmeshwar Kr. Chaudhary

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 215/2016, under Sections 147/148/149/342/332/333/307/323/336/353/364/308/504/506/4 27/364A/368 IPC and sections 3/4 of Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, Police Station-Cantt., District - Varanasi.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present crime. He further submits that main accused persons have been granted bail by this Court; the applicant has no connection with the present crime; neither the applicant participated in the alleged crime, nor he was present. It is stated that after taking note of entire facts and circumstances of the case, co-accused, namely, Aman @ Malik and Roshan Gupta @ Babu, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders dated 09.06.2016 and 07.10.2016 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 19189/2016 and 34637/2016. Accordingly, the applicant is also entitled for bail. 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 02.04.2016 and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is very bleak.

¶9

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 that co-accused have already been released on bail.

¶10

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 that co-accused have already been released on bail by this Court and without expressing any opinion on the

¶11

merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶12

Let applicant, namely, Arman Khan @ Bhuttan, 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:-

¶13

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

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

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.

¶18

Order Date :- 20.10.2022 Amit Mishra

¶19

(Piyush Agrawal,J.)

¶20

Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2022.10.20 16:54:14 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Arman Khan Alias Bhuttan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arman Khan Alias Bhuttan 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

Mahatab Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Tamanna and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ram Nivas Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home at Lucknow

Balram Saini Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Kumar Saini Vs State of U.P.