Allowed

Monu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 Apr 2023BAIL/59211/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application of Monu in Case Crime No. 492 of 2022 under Sections 147, 307 and 120B IPC. The Court noted allegations of one-sided investigation and uncertainty regarding the conclusion of the trial. Bail was granted subject to specific conditions regarding attendance, tampering with evidence, and adherence to court dates.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to specified conditions regarding court attendance and conduct.

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

¶1

Court No. - 85

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 59211 of 2022 Applicant :- Monu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Yogesh Kumar Srivastava,Noor Muhammad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶5

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Monu, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 492 of 2022, under Sections 147, 307 and 120B IPC, Police Station Ramgarh, District- Firozabad, during pendency of trial.

¶6

There is allegation against the applicant and co-accused, Dheeraj, that they have caused gun shot injury on the back of the injured from behind.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that there is only one gun shot injury found on the lower back of the injured. It is not clear who has caused the aforesaid injury out of two persons implicated. In the FIR, there are general allegations made against the four accused. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He is languishing in jail since 25.09.2022.

¶8

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, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

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 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

¶10

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 :-

¶11

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

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 11.4.2023 Abhishek

¶19

Digitally signed by :- RUCHI AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Monu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Monu 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

Pramod Kumar Mandal Alias Pramod Mandal Vs State of U.P.

Mohd Nashid @ Mohd Nashit Vs State of U.P. and Another

Basaruddin Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nijamudeen Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Papendra Vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Bhar Vs State of U.P.