Allowed

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

Allahabad HC27 Sept 2024BAIL/10405/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application, the Allahabad High Court at Lucknow Bench granted bail to the applicant, Angad Singh, accused under various IPC sections, imposing conditions regarding court appearance and evidence tampering while affirming prima facie satisfaction of the charge.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions restraining tampering with evidence and ensuring presence at trial.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:71188

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10405 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Angad Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Kumar Singh,Vishwas Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Supplementary Affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶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. 222 of 2024, under sections 409,420,467,468,471,120B of the I.P.C.,Police Station-Wazirganj, District -Lucknow.

¶9

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He next added that the applicant is running a Pharmacy College and he is the Manager of the said college and he is a reputed person in the society. He further added that the applicant has never committed any offence as is alleged in the first information report. He submits that the first information report was lodged on 30-07-2022 and the police has arrested the applicant without there being any cogent piece of evidence. He added that there are two cases criminal history of the applicant, which has been explained in the Supplementary Affidavit and the chargesheet has been filed in the case and thus, there is no apprehension that the applicant will flee away from the investigation proceedings. He further submits that the applicant undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶10

Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State

¶11

has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is not entitled for any relief as he has committed offence and there is documentary proof of the same.

¶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 21-08-2024; two cases criminal history of the applicant has been explained in the Supplementary Affidavit; the applicant is Manager of the Pharmacy College and the first information report was lodged prior two years back and later on, he has been arrested; the chargesheet has been filed, therefore, there is no possibility of fleeing away of the applicant from the investigation proceedings 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- Angad 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

¶17

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;

¶18

(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

¶19

(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.

¶20

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.

¶21

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.

¶22

Order Date :- 22.10.2024 AKS

¶23

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Himanshu Soni vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Mohd. Arshad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow

Shoeb Ali vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Vinay Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko.

Mr. Sagar Suri vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Angad Upadhyay vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Govt. of U.P. Lko.