Allowed

Sachin Punia v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Jul 2022BAIL/4235/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to the applicant, Sachin Punia, in a criminal case alleging attempt to murder. The High Court released him on a personal bond and two sureties, imposing specific conditions regarding witness tampering, attendance, and court appearances, citing the larger mandate of Article 21.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with strict conditions regarding witness tampering, attendance, and court appearances.

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

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4235 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sachin Punia Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Kesh Kumar Tiwari,Amit Krishna,Arunesh Singh,Ashutosh Mishra,Hari Shukla,Rakesh Kumar Singh Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Akhilesh Kumar Pandey,Ramanuj Saini

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Ashutosh Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Akhilesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the informant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Sachin Punia, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 558 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Sikandra, District- Agra, during pendency of trial.

¶8

FIR has been lodged against three named accused persons and 8- 10 unknown accused persons. There is allegation of attempt to murder against the applicant in the FIR. He is alleged to have fired upon the injured on his neck on the right side and caused incised wound of 2 cm. lateral from middle of neck and 4 cm. below the mandible size of wound 0.5 cm. x 0.5 cm. There is no internal damage caused inside the neck of the injured.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that no specific role has been to the applicant. It is not clear, who is author of the aforesaid injury suffered by the injured. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit and he is languishing in jail since 10.01.2022. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail 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. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 , 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 :-

¶12

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

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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 be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of 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 Ruchi Agrahari

¶20

Digitally signed by RUCHI AGRAHARI Date: 2022.07.29 13:12:53 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sachin Punia v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin Punia 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

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

Zaseem @ Appu Vs State of U.P.