Allowed

Rohit v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Mar 2023BAIL/55845/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to an under-trial accused facing serious charges including murder and attempt to murder. Based on the delay in trial, jail overcrowding, and the applicant's clean criminal record, the court ordered his release subject to strict conditions and directed the trial court to conclude proceedings expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on bail with a personal bond and two sureties, subject to strict conditions of appearance and trial cooperation, and a direction for speedy trial.

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

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 55845 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rohit Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pawankumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Virendra Jaiswal

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Virendra Jaiswal, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶6

This is second bail application of the applicant.

¶7

The first bail application of the applicant was rejected on 24.11.2020 by the coordinate Bench of this Court which is not available now.

¶8

This second bail application of the applicant has been filed on the ground that till date only one prosecution witness has been examined. The trial will take long time to conclude. This is the first implication of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 14.10.2019 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶9

On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶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; 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.

¶11

Let the applicant, Rohit, involved in Case Crime No. 238 of 2019, under Sections- 147, 148, 307, 302 IPC, Police Station- Fatehganj

¶12

East, District- Bareilly, 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.

¶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 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

(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

Trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the applicant as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶21

Registrar (compliance) is directed to communicate this order to the

¶22

trial Court for necessary compliance within a week.

¶23

Order Date :- 1.3.2023 Rohit

¶24

Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rohit v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit 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

Rohit and Another Vs State of U.P.

Ravindra Rana @ Tinku @ Pahalwan Vs State of U.P.

Vimal Vs State of U.P and 3 Others

Shekhar Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vinay Kumar Alias Beenu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others