Allowed

Sadaan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Aug 2023BAIL/23695/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad granted bail to the applicant in a case involving Sections 3/5/25 Arms Act. The court considered the applicant's non-presence at the incident, allegations of illegal custody, and prior bail orders for co-accused. Bail was granted subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties along with strict undertaking conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties with conditions to appear in court and not misuse bail.

Sadaan Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:162443

¶2

Court No. - 77

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23695 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Sadaan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kaushal Kumar Pandey,Anand Ji Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State-respondent and perused the material brought on record on the instant application for bail.

¶7

The present application for bail has been filed seeking bail in Case Crime/ FIR No. 140 of 2023, under Section 3/5/25 Arms Act, registered at Police Station- Medical, District- Meerut.

¶8

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is submitted that the applicant was not arrested on 20.04.2023 at the alleged place of incident but was picked up by the police at 06:00 AM on 18.04.2023 from his house and he was kept in illegal custody and later on he was implicated in the instant case. It is further submitted that the alleged house from where the applicant is shown to be arrested and the alleged recoveries which are alleged to have been recovered by the police team on 20.04.2023, does not belong to the applicant and neither the applicant is the tenant or in any way has any connection with the house. It is next contended that the alleged recovery are planted recovery and nothing has been recovered from his possession and the applicant was not

¶9

present at the place of incident. It is next contended that identically situated co-accused Shoaib and Anas, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.24321 of 2023 and 33285 of 2023, vide orders dated 09.06.2023 and 07.08.2023, hence the applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity of the orders aforesaid. The applicant is languishing in jail since 21.04.2023 having criminal history of one case in which he has been enlarged on bail by the court below vide order dated 05.10.2016 and the copy of the bail order is annexed as Annexure No. 6 and, in case, the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶10

On the other hand, learned AGA has very vehemently opposed the aforesaid contention.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the fact that applicant was not present at the place from the where the alleged recovery is made, applicant is languishing in jail since 21.04.2023 having criminal history of one case in which he has already been enlarged on bail by the court below coupled with the fact that identically situated co-accused Shoaib and Anas, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.24321 of 2023 and 33285 of 2023, vide orders dated 09.06.2023 and 07.08.2023 respectively and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail.

¶12

Let applicant- Sadaan be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(v) The applicant shall also furnish an undertaking from the sureties that the properties (movable/immovable) which are the basis of accepting the surety, shall not be disposed of by them till the conclusion of trial.

¶18

(vi) The applicant shall also give an undertaking to the effect that

¶19

he will not change his address without prior intimation to the trial court concerned.

¶20

(Renu Agarwal,J.)

¶21

Order Date :- 10.8.2023 Vikram

¶22

Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sadaan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sadaan 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

Sheshpal Vs State of U.P.

Vijay Prasad @ Vijay Chauhan Vs Union of India

Umesh Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Anuj @ Phukkadi Vs State of U.P.

Ashahar Alias Shebu Vs State of U.P.

Sufiyan Malik Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others