Appeal against bail orders. High Court found trial court failed to consider witness non-appearance and pendency. Allowed appeal, set aside lower court orders, and granted bail.
Impugned orders set aside; appellant released on bail; trial to conclude within one year; strict conditions regarding presence and conduct imposed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:3766
Court No. - 13
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 286 of 2021 Appellant :- Amarjeet Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Ors. Counsel for Appellant :- Shailendra Pratap Singh,Adarsh Mahendra,Brij Mohan Sahai,Brijesh Kumar Yadav,Indu Prakash Singh,Ramakar Shukla,Salil Shekhar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
and till today, only three witnesses have been examined and injured Kariya Dubey has not supported the prosecution version and the injured Jagga is not cooperating in the trial despite the issuance of summons against him. He further submitted that as the statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. are not reliable as in the statement of Kariya Dubey and Jagga, they made allegations against all the accused persons but name of two persons were dropped by the Investigating Officer.
(i) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will 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.
(ii) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their 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.
(iii) In case, the appellant 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.
(iv) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the appellant 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.
Order Date :- 12.1.2024 V. Sinha
Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned bail orders dated 07.12.2019 and 18.12.2019 should be set aside given the trial pendency and witness non-appearance.
Whether the appellant is entitled to be released on bail during the pendency of the appeal.
10 provisions across 2 enactments
Amarjeet Yadav
State Of U.P.
Privy Respondent 1
Privy Respondent 2
Privy Respondent 3
Rajeev Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
