Allowed

Munendra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Jun 2022BAIL/24398/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a bail application filed by Munendra. The High Court judicially allowed the bail application without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, as the applicant had no criminal history and the recovered tractors could not be connected to any crime yet.

What did the court decide?

Bail application allowed; applicant released on personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 47

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24398 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Munendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudarshan Singh,Anurag Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Sudarshan Singh and Sri Anurag Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri S.N. Mishra, learned AGA for the State and perused the record of the case.

¶6

By way of present application, applicant made a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 123 of 2022, under Sections 420, 406, 411, 413, 414, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Rajpura, District Sambhal, during the pendency of trial before the court below.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is not named in the FIR and there is specific allegation in the FIR only against the co-accused Matendra but during investigation later on, when co-accused Matendra and Jitendra were arrested on 24.4.2022, they disclosed the name of applicant and stated that in the nearby forest adjacent to the village, ten tractors were hidden by them and when police reached at spot then applicant and Mohar Pal were arrested and 10 tractors were also recovered. Learned counsel further submitted that entire recovery is totally false and baseless. Infact, applicant himself is a farmer and the alleged recovered ten tractors could not be connected with any crime, till date and applicant having no criminal history, therefore, he may be released on bail. He further submitted that the applicant undertakes that in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate in trial.

¶8

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that from the possession of the applicant and the coaccused Mohar Pal, huge quantity of tractors were recovered at the pointing out of co-accused Matendra and Jitendra and applicant was arrested on spot and he could not provide any explanation. Although, learned AGA could not disputed the fact that the alleged recovery could not be connected with any crime, till date and the applicant is having no criminal history.

¶9

I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶10

Admittedly, applicant is not named in the FIR. His name was

¶11

disclosed by co-accused Matendra who was named in the FIR. On 24.4.2022 when he was arrested alongwith co-accused Jitendra and on their pointing out, ten tractors were recovered from the place where applicant and another co-accused Mohar Pal were present. Admittedly, the recovered ten tractors could not be connected with any crime, till date and the applicant is having no criminal history, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Hence, the bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant- Munendra , 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 concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶13

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶14

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶15

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶16

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C.

¶17

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A IPC.

¶18

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavor and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶19

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶20

It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. It is further clarified that the trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶21

Order Date :- 21.6.2022 Ankita

¶22

Digitally signed by ANKITA SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.06.22 19:33:02 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Munendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Munendra 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ritik Lakhera Vs State of U.P.

Om Prakash Singh Vs State of U.P.

Narsingh Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Rahul Vs State of U.P.

Ramakant Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Jakir Vs State of U.P.