Babloo Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:107752

Court No. - 86

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15294 of 2023

Applicant :- Babloo Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Mithilesh Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the applicant has no concern with the alleged incident and no incriminating article has been recovered from the possession or on the pointing out of the applicant. The applicant is the cleaner of the vehicle in question. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 7.1.2023. It has been pointed out that the applicant has criminal history which has been duly explained in paragraph no.25 of the affidavit accompanying the bail application.

¶8

Keeping in view the nature of submissions advanced, the applicant is entitled for bail.

¶9

Let, the applicant- Babloo involved in Case Crime No.04 of 2023, under Section 3/5A/5B/8 Cow Slaughter Act and Section 11 Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and Section 429 I.P.C., Police StationSayyadraja, District-Chandauli be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with 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

¶12

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

Order Date :- 12.5.2023 Dev/-

¶16

Digitally signed by :- DEV PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Babloo v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babloo v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mitrapal Vs State of U.P.

Krishna Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Vikas @ Chamnesh Om Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ganesh Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Israr and Another Vs State of U.P.

Samujh Yadav @ Ramsamujh Vs State of U.P. thr. Prin. Secy. (Home) Govt. of U.P.