Allowed

Aleem v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Nov 2022BAIL/50689/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 50689 of 2022, the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad granted bail to the applicant, Aleem, in a case under Section 307 IPC, subject to specific conditions regarding court attendance and legal proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two local sureties upon compliance with specified conditions of court attendance and surety obligations.

Aleem Vs State of U.P. — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50689 of 2022 Applicant :- Aleem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶3

Heard Mr. Alok Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Amit Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the State as well as perused the entire material available on record.

¶4

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Aleem with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Crime No. 32 of 2020, under Section 307 I.P.C., Police Station-Barkhera, DistrictPilibhit, during the pendency of trial.

¶5

As per the prosecution case, on 1st February, 2020 at 06.16 a.m. the informant and other Police personnels have been informed by a Police informer that near the small bridge Village Jaar Kalliya to the road of village Bhuda Bikannapur, five to six butchers were standing in search of cows to do cow slaughter and they did have the tools of cow slaughter also. On the said information, the informant and other Police personnels reached and surrounded the said six persons. Seeing the Police, they exhorted to each other to kill them by Banka, Gandasha and Knives and they also tried to assault the Police Personnels but by using their police tactics they saved from their attack and making some effort they arrested them. After their arrest, the present first information report has been lodged against them.

¶6

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present first information report lodged by the Police is nothing but a bundle of lie and the same has been lodged only for exploiting the applicant by indulging his name in a fake, false and frivolous case. The entire prosecution story as unfolded in the first information report is absolutely a self-made story projected by the informant. The alleged recovery of one wooden log is planted one by the Police. There is no independent witness of the alleged recovery. No one Police personnels has received any injuries nor there is any medical report brought on record in that regard. Therefore, no case under Section 307 I.P.C. is made out against the applicant. The applicant has four criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one but the same have satisfactorily been explained in paragraph no. 11 to the affidavit accompanying the present bail application. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 24th September, 2022.

¶7

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the

¶8

applicant but he could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

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:-

¶10

(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.

¶11

(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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

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.

¶15

(Shiv Shanker Prasad, J.)

¶16

Order Date :- 18.11.2022 Sushil/-

¶17

Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.11.22 10:22:59 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Aleem v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aleem 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

Mohammad Afzaal @ Monu Rathaur Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Kami Vs State of U.P.

Sintu Vs State of U.P.

Jeeshan @ Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Daulat Vs State of U.P.

Chandani Vs State of U.P.