Allowed

Manik Chandra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC30 Jan 2023BAIL/59302/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application lodged under IPC and POCSO provisions, the High Court rejected the innocence argument at the pre-trial stage. Citing judicial over-crowding and Article 21, the court granted bail imposing strict conditions regarding attendance, witness tampering, and filing affidavits to prevent adjournments.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in like amounts.

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

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 59302 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Manik Chandra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sarvajeet Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Manik Chandra, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.445 of 2016, under Sections 363, 366, 376-D IPC and 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Jareef Nagar, DistrictBudaun, during pendency of trial.

¶7

This is third bail application of the applicant. The first and second bail applications of the applicant were rejected by co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 14.11.2017 & 27.11.2019 respectively, which is not available.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that during the filing of third bail application, co-accused, Raj Kumar @ Raghuraj, has been enlarged on bail in CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 53053 of 2019 on 13.1.2020. Before the trial court, only two prosecution witnesses have been examined till date. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit and he is languishing in jail since 8.9.2019. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

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.

¶10

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 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; 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 :-

¶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 :- 30.1.2023 Ruchi Agrahari

¶19

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

Manik Chandra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manik Chandra 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

Istekar Vs State of U.P.

Salma Vs State of U.P.

Pankaj Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mahrun Nisha Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Vs State of U.P.

Bauli @ Girwar Singh Vs State of U.P.