Allowed

Sameer @ Sageer v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Jun 2022BAIL/24570/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a bail application filed by Sameer @ Sageer in a snatching case. The court granted bail, emphasizing that the applicant was implicated only through a confession made six months post-arrest with no case-specific evidence recovered, alongside a declaration that the order does not decide the merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in like amount with conditions for attendance, non-tampering of evidence, and abiding by court orders.

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

¶1

Court No. - 47

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24570 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sameer @ Sageer Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Purushottam Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Purushottam Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Arvind Kumar learned A.G.A. 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. 578 of 2021, under Sections 392 & 411 IPC, Police Station-Uttar, District -Firozabad during the pendency of the trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant in the present case has been implicated by the local police and he was never indulged in any anti-social activities like snatching of chain and purse etc. He also submitted that applicant never snatched the purse and mobile of daughter of the informant as alleged in the FIR and during investigation he was made accused in the present matter merely, on the basis of confessional statement after about more than 6 months. He further submitted that at the time of arrest nothing incriminating article of the present case has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant further contended that applicant is having no previous criminal history. Although when he was arrested then on the basis of confessional statement he has been implicated in three cases by the local police. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate in trial.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. submitted that applicant is habitual snatcher and when he was arrested on 01.04.2022 then from his possession golden chain of others was recovered which was identified by the informant of that case but he could not dispute the fact that nothing was recovered from the possession of the applicant in respect of the present case and he was made accused in the present case after about more than 6 months merely on the basis of confessional statement.

¶9

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

¶10

Perusal of the record shows that FIR of the present case was lodged against unknown persons with allegations that the purse and mobile of daughter of the informant was snatched by two unknown person and applicant when arrested on 01.04.2022 then he confessed but nothing in respect of present case was recovered although some recovery was made from his possession in respect of other cases in which he was also made accused on 01.04.2022 on the basis of his confessional statement, no recovery of the present case was made from the possession of the applicant and he was made accused in the present case after more than 6 months on 01.04.2022 and except the confessional statement of the accused there is nothing on record against him and before 01.04.2022 he was not having any 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.

¶11

Let the applicant- Sameer @ Sageer 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:-

¶12

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

¶13

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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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

¶17

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 :- 22.6.2022 SY

¶22

Digitally signed by SWETA YADAV Date: 2022.06.24 18:27:40 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sameer @ Sageer v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sameer @ Sageer 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

Rahul Vs State of U.P.

Ramakant Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Jakir Vs State of U.P.

Guddu and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramkumar Mishra and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikrma Prasad Vs State of U.P.