Allowed¶14

Deepu v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.

Allahabad HC7 Nov 2024/11633/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail allowed; CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 11633 of 2024; Deepu v. State of U.P.; Case Crime No. 459 of 2024, Ss. 376/452/504/506 IPC, P.S. Gurubaksh Ganj, Raebareli; delayed F.I.R. (incident 7.6.2024, lodged 18.8.2024) via S.156(3) Cr.P.C.; informant is sister-in-law (Bhabhi), property-dispute motive; prior bail in Case Crime No. 42 of 2023 (Ss. 354/452/323/506 IPC); S.180 BNSS statement refused; charge-sheet filed; bail conditions referencing S.229-A IPC, S.82 Cr.P.C., S.174-A IPC, S.313 Cr.P.C.; decided 7.11.2024; Neutral Citation 2024:AHC-LKO:73654.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to applicant Deepu on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to five conditions imposed in the interest of justice. ¶14

Deepu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Deepu, in custody since 28.9.2024 in Case Crime No. 459 of 2024 under Sections 376, 452, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Gurubaksh Ganj, District Raebareli, is entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

Court's answer

Without entering into the merits, and considering the arguments of counsel, the contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the fact that the applicant is a distant relative of the informant (she is his sister-in-law/Bhabhi) with alleged ill intention arising from a property dispute, the earlier bail granted in Case Crime No. 42 of 2023, the informant's refusal to record her statement under Section 180 BNSS, the filing of the charge-sheet, and the applicant's undertaking not to misuse bail and to cooperate with the trial, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶13

Ratio / Principle

The applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions imposed in the interest of justice: (i) undertaking not to seek adjournments on evidence dates when witnesses are present; (ii) presence on each date, default actionable under Section 229-A IPC; (iii) upon misuse, Section 82 Cr.P.C. proclamation and Section 174-A IPC proceedings; (iv) personal presence at opening of case, framing of charge and Section 313 Cr.P.C. statement; (v) no leaving the country without court permission.

¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench (Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.) allowed Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11633 of 2024 by Deepu, in custody since 28.9.2024 in Case Crime No. 459 of 2024 under Sections 376, 452, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Gurubaksh Ganj, District Raebareli. The F.I.R. (incident 7.6.2024) was lodged on 18.8.2024 pursuant to a Magistrate's order on an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. Factors weighed: the informant is the applicant's sister-in-law (Bhabhi) and the allegation allegedly stems from a property dispute; the same informant had earlier lodged Case Crime No. 42 of 2023 under Sections 354, 452, 323, 506 IPC in which bail was granted on 5.4.2023; the informant refused to record her statement under Section 180 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita pending consultation with her advocate; the charge-sheet stood filed; and an undertaking was given not to misuse bail. Bail allowed subject to conditions: no adjournments when witnesses are present; presence on all dates (default actionable under Section 229-A IPC); Section 82 Cr.P.C. proclamation and Section 174-A IPC consequences on misuse; personal presence at opening of case, framing of charge and Section 313 Cr.P.C. statement; and no leaving the country without court permission.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:73654

¶2

Court No. - 11

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11633 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Deepu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home U.P. Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Vivek Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Rafiya Farooqui, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 28.9.2024 in Case Crime No. 459 of 2024 u/s 376, 452, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Gurubaksh Ganj, District Raebareli. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged.

¶9

Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the date of incident is 7.6.2024 but the F.I.R. has been lodged on 18.8.2024 pursuant to the order being passed by the court of Magistrate on an application filed u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the present applicant is a distant relative of the informant as she is sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the applicant having ill intention for some property dispute between the families. One more F.I.R. was lodged by the same informant against the present applicant bearing Case Crime no. 42 of 2023 u/s 354, 452, 323, 506 IPC, P.S. Gurubaxganj, District Raebareli wherein the learned court below granted bail to the applicant on 5.4.2023.

¶10

Attention has further been drawn towards the Annexure no. 4 which indicates that when the informant was asked to record statement u/s 180 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, she refused to record her statement by saying that she will record her statement after discussing with the Advocate. Learned counsel has stated that the

¶11

charge-sheet has been filed in this case and the learned counsel for the applicant has given an undertaking on behalf of applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if granted.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

Without entering into the merits of the case and considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the fact that the present applicant is a distant relative of the informant as she is sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the applicant having ill intention for some property dispute between the families, one more F.I.R. was lodged by the same informant against the present applicant bearing Case Crime no. 42 of 2023 u/s 354, 452, 323, 506 IPC, P.S. Gurubaxganj, District Raebareli wherein the learned court below granted bail to the applicant on 5.4.2023, when the informant was asked to record statement u/s 180 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, she refused to record her statement by saying that she will record her statement after discussing with the Advocate, charge-sheet has been filed in this case and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶14

Bail application is allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant Deepu , involved in aforesaid case 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶16

(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

¶17

court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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.

¶21

(v) The applicant shall not leave the country without permission of the Court concerned.

¶22

(Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.)

¶23

Order Date :- 7.11.2024 Om

¶24

Digitally signed by :- OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Deepu v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepu v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Jai Narayan Bajpai and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Ram Kumar Chaudhari and 2 Others Vs the Special Judge (Anticorruption /Cbi, West) Lucknow and 8 Others

Rampratap Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko

Shanti Devi @ Rajkumari @ Rajkumari Vs State of Up through Prin. Secy., Home Govt of Up Lucknow

Nishu Tomar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Irshad Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko