Allowed

Sohil Sisodiya v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Nov 2023BAIL/47600/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal bail application, the High Court granted bail to the accused under Section 364 IPC. Considering delays, overcrowding, and incomplete investigation favoring the prosecution, the court released the applicant on personal and surety bonds with strict conditions regarding presence and conduct.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in like amount subject to strict conditions of presence and conduct.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:221902

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47600 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Sohil Sisodiya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Pati Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Two supplementary-affidavits filed today are taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Sohil Sisodiya , with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 999 of 2022, under Sections 364 IPC, Police Station- Khurja Nagar, District- Bulandshahr, during pendency of trial.

¶8

This is the second bail application of applicant. The first bail application of applicant was rejected by this Court on 17.03.2023 by directing the trial court to conclude the trial against the applicant within a period of six months.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that before trial court five out of forty six prosecution witnesses only been examined. Before trial court the abductee has been examined as P.W.-II, who has not implicated the applicant with any role. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 22.10.2022. The trial in the aforesaid case is not likely to be concluded in near future.

¶10

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre-trial stage, therefore, she does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail, she will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, keeping in 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

¶12

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. & Another, passed in S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, judgement dated 11.7.2022 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime 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 with the following conditions that :-

¶13

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

¶14

(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.

¶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, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 22.11.2023 Abhishek

¶21

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sohil Sisodiya v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sohil Sisodiya 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

Sonu Lal Alias Sundar Lal Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Singh @ Jeetu Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Sona Devi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Shanti Devi Vs State of U.P.

Arjun Vs State of U.P.

Kamalnath Vs State of U.P.