Allowed

Zaseem @ Appu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Jul 2022BAIL/27971/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application, the Allahabad High Court released the applicant on bail with personal bond and sureties. The court relied on Article 21 and Apex Court precedent, imposing strict conditions to prevent tampering with evidence, absence during trial, and continuation of criminal activities.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail Subject to personal bond and two sureties under specified conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27971 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Zaseem @ Appu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Zaseem @ Appu, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 166 of 2022, under Sections 3/5/8 U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955, and section 11 Animal Cruelty Act, 1960 Police Station- Mainather, District- Moradabad, during pendency of trial.

¶7

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case by the informant with ulterior motive. No offence under Sections U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 has been committed by him warranting punishment under the aforesaid Act. He has further submitted that from the allegations made against the applicant no cognizable offence as per Section 9 of the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 is made out against him. The offence is triable by Magistrate and maximum sentence of 7 years. The applicant has criminal history of three cases which have been explained in paragraph- 2 of supplementary afÏdavit and he is in jail since 10.06.2022. In case the applicant is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty.

¶8

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. He has strongly opposed the bail and contended that cow slaughtering leads to acrimony between various groups of society. It has also resulted into riot like situations which poses serious problem for law and order before the State.

¶9

He has finally submitted that due to above reasons, State had to apply U.P. Gangster and AntiSocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 against some of such accuseds. He has pointed out that for the above reasons the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955, Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, U.P. Goshala Adhiniyam, 1964 and U.P. Go-Sewa Ayog Adhiniyam, 1999 have been enacted by the State Government.

¶10

Considering the material/evidence brought on record, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, larger mandate of Article 21 of the constitution of India, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶11

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶12

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶13

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶14

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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶15

In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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.

¶16

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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶17

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶18

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶19

Order Date :- 28.7.2022 Atul kr. sri.

¶20

Digitally signed by ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.07.28 18:11:51 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Zaseem @ Appu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Zaseem @ Appu 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

Rajendra Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Shailesh Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Mushtaque Alam Vs State of U.P.

Kamlesh Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Akshya Vs State of U.P.and Another

Amit Vs State of U.P.