Allowed

Bhagwandas @ Munna v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Oct 2022BAIL/36376/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted bail to the applicant in a trial under Section 25 of the Arms Act. The relief was subject to specific conditions regarding attendance, furnishing a personal bond, and non-availability penalties to prevent delay or tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was enlarged on bail subject to a personal bond and two local sureties, with conditions regarding attendance and prosecution for default.

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

¶1

Court No. - 58

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36376 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Bhagwandas @ Munna Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Sharma,Nand Kishor Mishra,Shilpa Ahuja Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant in the Court today is taken record.

¶6

Heard Ms. Shilpa Ahuja, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Shravan Kumar Ojha, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the entire material available on record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicantBhagwandas @ Munna with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Crime No. 211 of 1993, under Section 25 Arms Act, Police Station Rath, District-Hamirpur, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that initially the applicant has been granted bail in the aforesaid case, but he could not appear before the court below since 20th April, 2012 due unavoidable circumstances, which have satisfactorily been explained in paragraph nos. 9 to 11 of the affidavit accompanying the present bail application. Due to non appearance before the court below, non-bailable warrant has been issued against the applicant. Since the applicant was living another district for his livelihood, he has no knowledge about the said non-bailable warrant. On 11th July, 2022 as soon as he came to know about the said non-bailable warrant, he appeared before the court and has been sent to jail on 11th July, 2022.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has placed forth the circumstances under which the accused-applicant could not appear before the court when he was required and as a result of which his bail got cancelled. It has been submitted that henceforth no default shall be committed by the accused and he is prepared to give an undertaking that he shall faithfully make himself available to the court on each and every date. It has also been pointed out that the accused is not having any criminal history except Crime No. 195 of 1993 in which has already been acquitted by the court below and he is in jail since 11th July, 2022, and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail, but he could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for

¶11

the applicant.

¶12

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar with regard to explanation offered by the accused for his default and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶13

Considering the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of cases and release the accused, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, let the applicant 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:-

¶14

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(v) The applicant shall personally appear once in the first week of every month in the concerned Police Station. In case of any default, the In-charge, Police Station shall forthwith inform the concerned court about this breach.

¶19

In case of default of compliance with condition no. (v) enumerated

¶20

herein above, the order granting bail shall stand cancelled automatically and the court concerned shall issue warrant in order to get the applicant arrested and lodge him in jail.

¶21

Office is required to communicate this order to the S.S.P. concerned who is required to convey this order to the concerned police station to ensure compliance of condition no. (v) as provided herein before.

¶22

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶23

(Shiv Shanker Prasad, J.)

¶24

Order Date :- 19.10.2022

¶25

Sushil/-

¶26

Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.10.21 09:31:53 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Bhagwandas @ Munna v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhagwandas @ Munna 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

Amit Lalwani Vs State of U.P.

Shyam Swaroop Alias Sonu and Another Vs State of U.P.

Chhotey Vs State of U.P.

Naushad Vs State of U.P.

Praveen Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Sahibul Islam and Another Vs State of U.P.