Allowed

Jeeshan @ Sonu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Nov 2022BAIL/50763/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to the applicant in a case under Section 307 IPC. The applicant was required to furnish a personal bond and two local sureties. Various conditions were imposed regarding appearance before the trial court and avoiding misuse of bail.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties, subject to the stipulated conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50763 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Jeeshan @ Sonu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunder Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Jeeshan @ Sonu with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 0261 of 2020, under Section 307 I.P.C., Police Station- Siyana, District- Bulandshahr, during the pendency of the trial.

¶7

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case for the purpose of harassment. It is further submitted that the role of firing is assigned to co-accused Samir Ahmad @ Sonu whereas applicant has given the role of catching hold. It is also submitted that co-accused Samir Ahmad @ Sonu and Krishna have already been enlarged on bail by the coordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 26.10.2021 and 05.01.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 23024 of 2021 and 39346 of 2020 and the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant has no criminal history. 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 30.07.2022.

¶8

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the 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 of the accused, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment as well as the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, 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

¶10

concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶11

(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.

¶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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶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. 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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

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.

¶16

Order Date :- 18.11.2022 SK Srivastava

¶17

Digitally signed by SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.11.19 13:28:15 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jeeshan @ Sonu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeeshan @ Sonu 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

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

Deepak Kami Vs State of U.P.

Sintu Vs State of U.P.

Aleem Vs State of U.P.

Daulat Vs State of U.P.

Chandani Vs State of U.P.