Allowed

Smt Migthang Sage v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Aug 2023BAIL/33493/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court granted bail to the applicant, who was in custody since October 2022, citing parity with co-accused already released. She must furnish a personal bond and two sureties, including one local surety, under specific conditions regarding her presence and address.

What did the court decide?

Order to release applicant on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties (one local) with specific conditions.

Smt Migthang Sage Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:166028

¶2

Court No. - 77 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33493 of 2023 Applicant :- Smt Migthang Sage Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Singh,Saurabh Sachan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal,J.

¶4

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.

¶5

The present application for bail has been filed seeking bail in Case Crime No.0145 of 2022, under section 3/5/7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, Police Station Colonganj, District Kanpur Nagar.

¶6

Learned counsel for the accused-applicants submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case due to ulterior motives. Similarly situated co-accused Rahil Ansari, Rahul and Lalnun Himi, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.54332 of 2022, 52708 of 2022 and 33497 of 2023, vide orders dated 05.12.2022, 13.12.2022 and 08.08.2023, 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 13.10.2022 having no previous criminal history except this case and in case she is granted bail, she will not misuse the liberty and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶7

On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not controvert the above mentioned facts.

¶8

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account that similarly situated co-accused Rahil Ansari, Rahul and Lalnun Himi, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.54332 of 2022, 52708 of 2022 and 33497 of 2023, vide orders dated 05.12.2022, 13.12.2022 and 08.08.2023, applicant is languishing in jail since 13.10.2022 having no previous criminal history except this case and undertakes that in case she is granted bail, she will not misuse the liberty and would cooperate in the trial proceedings without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail.

¶9

Let applicant Smt Migthang Sage be released on bail in the above case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each (one should be local surety) in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶10

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she 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 him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(vi) The applicant shall also give an undertaking to the effect that he will not change his address without prior intimation to the trial court concerned and shall remain present before the concerned police station in the first week of every alternate months to ensure her presence, as she is resident of Mizoram.

¶16

(Renu Agarwal,J.)

¶17

Order Date :- 17.8.2023/VKG

¶18

Digitally signed by :- VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt Migthang Sage v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Migthang Sage 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

Tarsem Vs State of U.P.

Guddu @ Omkar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Aasif Jamal Vs State of U.P.

Aman Soni Vs State of U.P.

Prakash Seth @ Raja Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Vs State of U.P.