Javed Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:26947

Court No. - 8

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1540 of 2023

Applicant :- Javed Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arun Sinha,Siddhartha Sinha

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Counter afÏdavit filed by learned counsel for the complainant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Raj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State of U.P. and Sri Aditya Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Siddhartha Sinha, learned counsel for the complainant.

¶8

This is second bail application moved on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.856 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 364, 307, 302, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station - Kotwali Nagar, District - Sultanpur, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail, however, first bail application was rejected by Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, J. vide order dated 20.7.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.12810 of 2021.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case due to enmity and he is in jail since 3.11.2020. He further submits that 11 persons are named and 3-4 persons are unknown in the F.I.R. and no specific role has been assigned to the applicant. He also submits that after detail investigation, final report was submitted in the present case and till today, only 3 witnesses have been examined out of 28 witnesses. He further submits that applicant is ready to cooperate in the trial, there is no possibility of conclusion of trial in near future and he will not involve in any illegal activities in the future. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for grant of bail and submit that active involvement of the applicant was found in the crime but they do not dispute this fact that general allegations have been levelled against 15 persons.

¶11

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A., material available on record, contents of F.I.R., other relevant documents, it is evident that general allegations have been levelled against all the accused persons and till today only three witnesses has been examined out of 28 witnesses, therefore, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

Let applicant - Javed - be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶14

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶15

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶16

(iv) 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 sufÏcient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶17

(v) 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., may be issued and if 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 IPC.

¶18

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 sufÏcient 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.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 1.4.2024 Gaurav/-

¶21

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Javed v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Javed v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Similar cases

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

Sageer Ahmad @ Sabir Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Sandeep Verma and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and 3 Others

Kanhaiya Awasthi vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Brij Raj Ram Alias Brij Raj vs Mr. Kartikeya Singh, S.D.M., Lakhimpur Kheri and Others

Anil Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Deptt. and Another