Allowed

Shivakant v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC26 Sept 2022BAIL/36482/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application filed by Shivakant challenging criminal charges. The Court, noting a pending civil dispute over property title and the applicant's incarceration for over a year, allowed bail on the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution without deciding the merits, subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on bail with a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount, subject to specific conditions regarding presence and conduct.

Shivakant Vs State of U.P. — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 90

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36482 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shivakant Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sarvesh Kumar Dubey,Bhavisya Sharma

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Sarvesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Shivakant , with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.0340 of 2020, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Tirwa, District Kannauj, during pendency of trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the dispute is essentially of civil nature regarding title of property in question which is pending determination before the Court of Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Kannauj in Appeal No. 544/613 of 2009-2010, in which father of the applicant Babulal was one of the appellant. He further submits that accused-applicant has not prepared any forged document. The co-accused, Ram Kishor, who has been charge-sheeted alongwith applicant, has been enlarged on bail, vide order dated 04.12.2021 passed by coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.36209 of 2021. The accused-applicant has also been granted bail in a similar case registered at same police station and in the same penal sections vide order dated 18.08.2022 passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 34741 of 2022. Apart from these two cases, the applicant is not having any criminal case to his credit. The applicant is languishing in jail since 29.06.2021.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail of applicant and submitted that it is admitted fact that the case of the accusedapplicant stands on different footing than that of co-accused Ram Kishore, who has been granted bail. The applicant is made accused in this case and he has been charge-sheeted in this case. The investigation against other co-accused is pending. The accused-applicant has sold the property in question without

¶10

having any authority to do so and for that purposes got prepared forged document.

¶11

Considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties as well as the fact that question of title of property in question is pending determination before the competent Consolidation Court and the applicant is languishing in jail for more than one year and no investigation is pending against the applicant any more, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that it is a fit case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶12

Having considered the material on record, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another , reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶13

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶14

(ii) 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

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. 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

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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

(v) 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

¶18

be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.

¶20

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

¶21

Order Date :- 26.9.2022 Shafique

¶22

Digitally signed by SAFIKUR RAHAMAN Date: 2022.09.27 14:41:22 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shivakant v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivakant 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

Smt. Aneeta Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

State of U.P. Vs Hori Lal

State of U.P. Vs Siya Ram

Jitu @ Jitendra Vs State of U.P.

Mishareyar Khan @ Kallu Vs State of U.P.

Meharban @ Lukka Vs State of U.P.