Allowed

Dalbag Singh @ Dilbag Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC16 Apr 2024BAIL/3605/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail sought in an alleged pistol-point robbery and snatching of a tractor carrying paddy. Counsel argued the recovery memo was self-contradictory on the applicant's arrest. The court noted the offences are triable by a magistrate, the charge sheet was filed, and the applicant had been in jail since October 2023, and enlarged him on bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in like amount, with standard conditions against tampering, witness intimidation, and absence from trial dates.

Dalbag Singh @ Dilbag Singh vs State of U.P. Thru… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:53536

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3605 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Dalbag Singh @ Dilbag Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Tushar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶7

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

¶8

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that in the night of 1314.10.2023, the complainant Jaspal Singh through his Johndear Tractor having 160 quintal of paddy in two trolleys sent them for selling with driver Dinesh Kumar and labour Sonu Bhargav to Gola at the rice mill of Nitin Aggarwal. In the morning at around 5:00 am, one Creta car stopped the tractor and two persons came out. The alleged two persons by showing pistol to driver and labour forced them to sit in the Creta and the another accused snatched the tractor from the driver and took it towards Lakhimpur Kheri. The phones of the driver and labour were also snatched by them.

¶9

Learned counsel fr the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated. Applicant's counsel has drawn attention of the Court towards the recovery memo which is self contradictory. At one place, in the recovery memo, it is said that Dalbagh Singh (applicant) ran away from the spot and at the second place, in the same recovery memo, Dalbagh Singh is shown arrested and has also shown to be identified by the driver.

¶10

It has been further submitted that both things cannot be true.

¶11

The prosecution story is completely falsified by the said recovery memo. The offences are triable by magistrate. Charge sheet in the matter has been filed. The applicant is in jail since 18.10.2023. Till date the trial has not commenced.

¶12

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

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.

¶14

On due consideration to the contents of the recovery memo, so also considering the fact that the offences are triable by magistrate; he has explained his criminal history, coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 18.10.2023 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶15

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶16

Let the applicant, Dalbag Singh @ Dilbag Singh, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 611/2023, under Sections 392/411/420/467/468/471 IPC, Police Station - Gola, District - Lakhimpur Kheri, 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:-

¶17

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶18

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶19

(iii) 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

¶20

facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

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

¶22

(v) 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.

¶23

(vi) 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.

¶24

Order Date :- 5.8.2024

¶25

R.C.

¶26

Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dalbag Singh @ Dilbag Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dalbag Singh @ Dilbag Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home 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

Santosh Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Civil Secrtt. Lko.

Gobind Chandra Patra (as in the Fir ) (Gobind Chandra Patra as in the Adhar ) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Saurav Jaiswal @ Saurabh Jaiswal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Santosh Lodhi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Vijay Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

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