In a criminal bail application under Sections 392, 411, and 34 IPC, the court released the applicant on personal bond and two local sureties. Conditions were imposed to prevent absence from court, misuse of bail, and tampering with witnesses, citing a Supreme Court precedent.
Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 90
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51068 of 2022
Applicant :- Sharik Malik Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Yogendra Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.
Heard Mr. Yogendra Pal Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Shravan Kumar Ojha, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the entire material available on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Sharik Malik a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Crime No. 258 of 2022, under Sections 392, 411 and 34 I.P.C., Police Station-Kankerkhera, District-Meerut, during the pendency of trial.
The allegations made in the first information report by the first informant, namely Madhav Arora is that on 26th July, 2021 at about 06.00 a.m. the informant went to Kankerkhera and when he was standing in front of Central Cafe, one unknown person snatched his mobile phone of Samsung Company.
The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not been named in the present first information report. On 25th April, 2022 he along with nine other persons were arrested by the Police and seven mobile phones are alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant. On the confessional statement given by the Police after his arrest, he has been implicated in the present case. It is well settled that as per the Evidence Act, the statement given before the Police has no evidentiary value. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the mobile phone which is alleged to have been snatched from the first informant is not one of the mobile phones, which are alleged to have been recovered from the applicant. No identification parade to recognize the applicant by the first information has been done by the Police. There is also no independent witness of the alleged recovery, inasmuch as the alleged recovery is planted one by the Police. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. 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 15th June, 2022.
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.
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:-
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
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.
(Shiv Shanker Prasad, J.)
Order Date :- 15.11.2022 Sushil/-
Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.11.16 10:38:47 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant should be released on bail in the present robbery and theft case subject to conditions.
What conditions the court should impose to prevent misuse of bail or tampering with witnesses.
Whether the impugned order should be confined to the bail matter without prejudicing the merits of the case.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and anotherRelied on¶11
(2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
5 provisions across 3 enactments
Sharik Malik
Shiv Shanker Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
