Allowed

Sanoj v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Nov 2023BAIL/47230/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bench allowed a bail application. Considering principles under Article 21, the Satendra Kumar Antil judgment, and significant jail overcrowding, the court held that the applicant made out a case for bail without fully examining the merits of the criminal allegations.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Sanoj was released on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, and complying with conditions regarding appearance, tampering with evidence, and attendance at proceedi

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:216725

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47230 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Sanoj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raghubir Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Virat Pratap Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Akash Ojha, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Raghubir Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Virat Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

There is allegation against the applicant of committing offence of rioting, forming unlawful assembly and also committing offence of attempt to murder and murder of one person.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the role of firing has been assigned to the co-accused, Sachin and not to the applicant. Applicant alleges false implication in this case. He is in jail since 06.08.2023 and has criminal history of four cases.

¶9

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties 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 and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and 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.

¶11

Let the applicant, Sanoj, involved in Case Crime No.217 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 506 I.P.C, Police Station Linepar, DistrictFirozabad be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶12

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶13

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek

¶14

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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.

¶19

Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶20

Order Date :- 9.11.2023 SS

¶21

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

Sanoj v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanoj 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

Chandrapal Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Singh @ Kakku Singh Vs State of U.P.

Chandrabhan Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Rai Vs State of U.P.

Aman Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Bhavna Vs State of U.P.