Allowed

Guddu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 May 2022BAIL/4533/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant in a criminal negligence case involving jointly punishable offences, noting that co-accused had already been released on bail and granting bail on grounds of parity without expressing an opinion on the merit of the case.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties and compliance with specific conditions regarding court appearance.

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

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4533 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Guddu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Bhan Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 449 of 2021, under Sections397, 411 and 120-B I.P.C., Police Station- Bilsi, District Budaun.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present crime. He submitted that co-accused Dharmendra, Shanu and Naim have already been released on bail by this Court vide orders dated 29-03-2022, 30-03-2022 and 04-04-2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 7974 of 2022, 7493 of 2022 and 7505 of 2022 respectively and the case of the applicant is identical to the case of Co-accused. Accordingly, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, he may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is in jail since 03-12-2021.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he has not disputed the above contention made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant that the co-accused person have already been released on bail.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in mind that co-accused person have already been released on bail by this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶10

Let applicant- Guddu be released on bail in aforesaid Case

¶11

Crime Number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions :-

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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 his under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and proceed against the applicant in accordance with law.

¶17

This order shall not influence the trial Court for proceeding with the trial.

¶18

The application stands disposed of.

¶19

Order Date :- 5.5.2022 pks

¶20

Digitally signed by PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.05.06 12:52:44 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Guddu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guddu 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

Pawan Agrawal Vs State of U.P.

Pavan Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Ravi @ Ravindra Dhaka Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Jagjeevan Vs State of U.P.

Radheyshyam @ Radhey Vs State of U.P.