Allowed

Savej v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Mar 2023BAIL/55317/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Savej accused under Section 452, 323, 504, 506, 308 and 325 IPC. The court recorded that the applicant was in jail since October 2022 and granted bail without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case, subject to specific conditions. The judgment directed the trial court to conclude the trial within one year.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties (one to be a family member) each in like amount.

Savej Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 55317 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Savej Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pawan Singh Pundir,Virendra Singh Tomar

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Syed Mohd Taqi Abdi

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶7

None appears on behalf of opposite party no.2 even in revise call.

¶8

It is contended by the learned counsel for applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that the entire allegation is false and fake. The applicant has committed no offence. No specific role or involvement has been attributed to the applicant. No incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. The applicant has criminal history one case, which is explained in the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is languishing in jail since 30.10.2022. It is lastly contended that in case the applicant is released on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶11

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶12

Let the applicant Savej involved in Case Crime No. 658 of 2022, under Section 452, 323, 504, 506, 308 & 325 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Muzaffarnagar be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties (one should be of his family member) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the

¶13

court concerned with the following conditions.

¶14

(i) 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

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶19

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶20

It is further directed that the court below concerned shall conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one year without granting any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties.

¶21

Order Date :- 23.3.2023 CS/-

¶22

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

Savej v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Savej 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

Rahul Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ayushi Agrawal Vs State of U.P.

Vishal Pathak Vs State of U.P.

Mohd Faiz Vs State of U.P.

Mohit Vs State of U.P.

Jumma Khan Vs Union of India through Intelligence Officer