Allowed

Satyaram v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2023BAIL/50334/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held that applicant made out a case for bail. Allowed bail application under Section 380 and 411 IPC. Granted release on personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions preventing tampering with evidence and requiring presence at trial court proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in like amount, subject to conditions of non-tampering with evidence and appearance at trial.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:228158

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50334 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Satyaram Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Chaturvedi,Sangeeta Shukla

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶7

List has been revised.

¶8

Heard Sri Vipin Chandra Pandey, learned Advocate holding brief for Sri Sushil Kumar Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri J.K. Jaiswal, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶9

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 57 of 2023, U/S 380, 411 IPC, Police Station Basai Arela, District Agra, during the pendency of trial.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of the said recovery of stolen article. The FIR is stated to have been instituted against unknown persons. It is next stated that there is no identification parade conducted as per Section 9 of the Indian Evidence Act.

¶11

Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. It is further stated that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 19.9.2023. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but has not disputed the fact that there is no criminal history of the applicant.

¶13

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view

¶14

that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶15

Let the applicant- Satyaram who is involved in aforementioned case 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶16

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶20

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶21

Order Date :- 2.12.2023 Shalini

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Satyaram v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satyaram 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suneel Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sachin Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dashrath Bharti Vs State of U.P.

Geeta Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Amir Vs State of U.P.

Ankur Yadav Vs State of U.P.