Allowed

Jugraj Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Aug 2023BAIL/17070/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the Allahabad High Court granted bail to the applicant. The court considered the applicant's long incarceration exceeding five years and his medical condition regarding a neurological problem. It also noted the examination of prosecution witnesses, finding no risk of evidence tampering.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties.

Jugraj Singh Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:169243

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17070 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Jugraj Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bhawesh Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Bhawesh Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shatruhan Yadav, learned AGA for the State.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 101 of 2018, under Sections 376, 506, 458 IPC, Police Station Narwal, District Kanpur Nagar during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that this is second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed by this Court on 06.12.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 10042 of 2019 and he is pressing the instant second bail application on the ground that applicant in the present matter is in jail since 28.05.2018 i.e. for more than five years and is suffering with Neurological problem.

¶9

He further submits that in the charge-sheet there are as many as 11 witnesses but till date 9 prosecution witnesses have been examined including the prosecutrix of the case, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the prosecution evidence, therefore, considering the long incarceration of the applicant of five years and medical condition of the applicant, he may be enlarged on bail.

¶10

He further submits that although applicant is having criminal history of 11 cases but he has explained his criminal history in paragraph-17 of the affidavit and from its perusal it appears that majority of cases were of Goonda Act and of Section 110 Cr.P.C., therefore, merely on the basis of criminal history of the applicant it cannot be said that applicant is hardened criminal.

¶11

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and

¶12

submitted that this is second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed by this Court after considering the entire facts of the case and he is having criminal history of 11 cases and out of 11 witnesses 9 witnesses have already been examined but learned AGA could not dispute the fact that from Annexure-10 to the affidavit it appears that applicant is suffering with some Neurological problem and he is in jail for more than five years and prosecutrix of the case has already been examined, therefore, there is no chance of any tampering with the prosecution evidence.

¶13

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶14

However, this is second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and applicant is also having criminal history of 11 cases but from the criminal history of the applicant it appears that majority of cases were of Goonda Act and of Section 110 Cr.P.C.

¶15

Further, applicant is in jail since 28.05.2018 i.e. for more than five years and as per Annexure-10 to the affidavit it appears that he is suffering with some Neurological problem and prosecutrix of the case has already been examined, therefore, I find force in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no chance of tampering with the prosecution evidence.

¶16

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case particularly long incarceration of the applicant of five years as well as the fact that he is suffering with Neurological problem, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶17

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶18

Let the applicant - Jugraj Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶19

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶20

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶23

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶24

Order Date :- 22.8.2023 AK Pandey

¶25

Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jugraj Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jugraj Singh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sajid Siddiqui Vs State of U.P.

Ramesh Chandra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raju Rajbhar Vs State of U.P.

Dharamveer Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mustkim Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ramesh Vs State of U.P.