Allowed

Ram Babu Awasthi @ Badelala and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Mar 2023BAIL/12180/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court granted bail to applicants in a case of rioting and attempt to murder, citing Article 21, jail overcrowding, and lack of modus operandi evidence while imposing strict reporting and appearance conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail furnishing personal bond and two sureties each, subject to rigorous conditions of reporting and court appearance.

Ram Babu Awasthi @ Badelala and Another Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 85

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12180 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Ram Babu Awasthi @ Badelala And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

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

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

There is allegation against the applicants and other co-accused of rioting, forming illegal assembly and committing the offence of attempt to murder after entering into the house of the informant besides offences of threatening and beating.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant also submits that all the accused persons have been generally implicated. The injuries suffered by two injureds are simple in nature. The applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. They are in jail since 09.05.2022 and have criminal history of seven cases to their credits.

¶9

On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicants being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 ; considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicants, Ram Babu Awasthi @ Badelala and Vinod

¶12

Awasthi @ Bhure, involved in Case Crime No. 002 of 2020, under Sections- 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 452, 307, 324 IPC, Police Station- Amritpur, District- Farrukhabad, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶13

(i) The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶14

(ii) The applicant will report his presence before the Police Station- Amritpur, District- Farrukhabad , in first week of every second month till the trial against the applicant is concluded.

¶15

(iii) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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.

¶16

(iv) The applicants shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(v) In case the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against them in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(vi) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law.

¶19

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

¶20

Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶21

Order Date :- 20.3.2023 Rohit

¶22

Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ram Babu Awasthi @ Badelala and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Babu Awasthi @ Badelala and Another 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

Sushma Vs State of U.P.

Sohil Sisodiya Vs State of U.P.

Monu Vs State of U.P.

Isha Agrawal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anurag Chaturvedi @ Bhodu and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Atul Uraf Aahu Vs State of U.P.