Allowed

Varasat Ali v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Sept 2023BAIL/30270/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 30270 of 2023, a single-judge High Court court allowed bail for the applicant, who had been in jail since 21.12.2022 while facing charges under Sections 409, 420, 504, 506 IPC. The court ordered the applicant's release on a personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions not to tamper with evidence and to appear before the trial court.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:177695

¶2

Court No. - 66

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30270 of 2023 Applicant :- Varasat Ali Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

This is the second bail application.

¶6

Matter is called out. None appears for the applicant to press the bail application. The names of the learned counsel for the applicant is shown in the cause list.

¶7

Learned counsel at the Bar has been requested to assist the Court in the matter. This Court in the light of the holding in Maneesh Pathak vs. State of U.P. passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 18536 of 2020 is not dismissing the case for non prosecution. Learned members at the Bar have volunteered to assist the Court pro bono in the highest tradition of the profession. The Court has appointed learned counsel as amicus curiae.

¶8

By means of the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 392 of 2022 at Police Station- Khalilabad, District- Sant Kabir Nagar under Sections 409, 420, 504, 506 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 21.12.2022.

¶9

The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on 23.02.2023.

¶10

The following arguments made by learned counsel as amicus curiae for the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by learned AGA from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

¶11

This Court while rejecting the earlier bail application passed the following order:

¶12

"Considering the gravity of the offence, interest of justice will be served by directing the learned trial court to expedite the trial within a stipulated period of time.

¶13

The trial court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of one year from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The learned trial court shall proceed with the hearing on a day to day basis to ensure that the above stipulated timeline of one year is strictly adhered to. All witnesses and counsels are directed to cooperate with the trial proceedings."

¶14

The applicant is a law abiding citizen who cooperated with the police investigations and had joined the trial.

¶15

The applicant did not influence witnesses nor did he tamper with the evidence.

¶16

Status report sent by the learned trial court records that all prosecution witnesses have been examined. The applicant needs to prepare his defence and tender the same before the learned trial court. The applicant is being incapacitated from formulating his defence and gathering

¶17

evidence in support thereof due to his incarceration.

¶18

There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.

¶19

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶20

Let the applicant- Varasat Ali be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶21

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial.

¶22

(ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶23

The Court has been informed that the lawyers in districtSant Kabir Nagar are striking work. Liberty of citizens is too sacrosanct and cannot be held to ransom by striking lawyers.

¶24

The District Legal Services Authority (DLSA), Sant Kabir Nagar shall ensure that appropriate legal aid is made available to the applicant for purposes of submitting sureties and completion of other formalities for being set forth at liberty.

¶25

Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA), Sant Kabir Nagar for onward communication to the applicant who is in jail, and for assisting the applicant in the manner stated above.

¶26

Order Date :- 13.9.2023 Pravin

¶27

Digitally signed by :- PRAVIN VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Varasat Ali v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varasat Ali 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

Pintu Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rajinder Saini Vs State of U.P.

Nanhey @ Amit Vs State of U.P.

Sachin @ Surendra Vs State of U.P.

Vijaymal Vs State of U.P.

Brijesh Kumar Pal Vs State of U.P.