The High Court allowed a bail application regarding abduction, unlawful confinement, and gang rape charges. The court cited Article 21 and jail overcrowding to grant bail without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.
Released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties subject to complying with court orders on trial dates and conduct.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:203674
Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43711 of 2023
Applicant :- Udai Veer Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 ; considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) 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.
(v) 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.
Order Date :- 26.10.2023 Rohit
Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail ought to be granted to the applicant in a case involving abduction of a minor, unlawful confinement, and gang rape allegations.
Whether the uncertainty regarding the conclusion of trial and overcrowding in jails warrant grants of bail without deciding the merits.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I.Referred¶13
Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021
5 provisions across 3 enactments
Udai Veer
State Of U.P.
Siddharth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
