Allowed

Dilip v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Nov 2022BAIL/42598/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application allowed by Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav, J. Court found it fit case for bail for the applicant accused without expressing opinion on merits, subject to specific conditions regarding attendance and trial conclusion within one year.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing personal bond and two heavy sureties subject to conditions regarding attendance, trial closure within one year, and no adjournments during evidence.

Dilip Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42598 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Dilip Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Pathak,Ramesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicantDilip in Case Crime No.488 of 2022, arising out of case crime no.0077 of 2022, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 302, 34 IPC, Police Station Sevarahi, District Kushinagar with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶7

The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant-accused is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. Further submits that the applicant is aged about 21 years and 70% handicapped, copy of certificate is annexed as Annexure No.7 to this affidavit filed in support of the bail applicant. There is no ante mortem injury. There is no recovery from the applicant. As per FIR, all the accused persons having lathis-dandas, whereas in the postmortem incised wound has been shown. Lastly, it is argued that the applicant is languishing in jail since 5.4.2022 having no previous criminal history and in case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, however, he could not controvert the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, submission of learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶10

Let the applicant- Dilip involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions :

¶11

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

¶12

(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 IPC.

¶13

(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., 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 IPC.

¶14

(iv) 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 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.

¶15

(v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.

¶16

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

¶17

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶18

Order Date :- 2.11.2022 SFH

¶19

Digitally signed by SYED FAHIM HUSAIN Date: 2022.11.03 16:45:03 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dilip v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilip 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

Irfan Vs State of U.P.

Ram Gopal Alias Makhan Vs State of U.P.

Rajendra Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Prahlad Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others

Deepak Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Abhishek Alias Gullu Vs State of U.P.