Allowed

Govind Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Allahabad HC18 Oct 2024/10940/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court dismissed objections and allowed the bail petition of an applicant accused under BNS and the Public Examinations Act. The Court noted the applicant's lack of prior record and granted bail on surety bonds with strict conditions not to tamper with evidence or absent from proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties, conditioned not to tamper with evidence or constraints on securing adjournments.

Govind Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:70237

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10940 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Govind Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Pandey,Jagriti Bardhan Rao,Jyotika Yog Sharma

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶7

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

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 248 of 2024, under sections 319(2),318(4),338,336(3),340(2), 61 of B.N.S. & sections 13(1),13(5) of the Public Examinations Act, Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, DistrictBalrampur.

¶9

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been planted by the police in the instant matter. He next added that the applicant was posted as Constable and he went to district-Balrampur to meet one of his relatives and being the friend of the accused namely, Bhagwan Singh, the applicant has been implicated in the instant matter. He added that the name of the applicant came into light only on the confessional statement of the co-accused, Bhagwan Singh. He added that there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant and he has no previous criminal antecedent as is mentioned in paragraph no. 19 of the bail application. Further submitted that the applicant is not involved in any kind of unlawful activities including the Solver Gang and he is languishing in jail since 25-082024. He next added that the applicant undertakes

¶10

that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶11

Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is named in the first information report and he was arrested at the Examination Centre and there are ample evidences against him and as such, he is not entitled for any relief.

¶12

Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is languishing in jail since 25-08-2024; there is no previous criminal antecedent of the applicant as has been explained in paragraph 19 of the bail application; the applicant was posted as Constable and as per the argument of learned counsel for the applicant, he went to district-Balrampur to meet one of his relatives coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶13

Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.

¶14

Let the applicant- Govind Singh involved in the aforementioned 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:-

¶15

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶16

(2) 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. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶17

(3) 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.; and

¶18

(4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶20

It is clarified that the observations 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 merits of the case.

¶21

Order Date :- 18.10.2024/AKS

¶22

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Govind Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Govind Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sachin Jaisawal vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Ram Kishor Tiwari @ Ram Kishor Dutt Tiwari vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Smt. Asha Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. S.I.T. Lko

Ram Bachan Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Vandana Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Praveen Kumar Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and Another