Allowed

Deewan Singh v. Stae of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Allahabad HC28 Aug 2024BAIL/9111/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 9111 of 2024, the High Court at Allahabad (Lucknow Bench) granted bail to Deewan Singh accused of offences under sections 394, 411, 413, 419, 420, 467, 468 IPC. Considering lack of independent public witnesses and explained antecedents, the court held it a fit case of bail under Article 21.

What did the court decide?

Accused released on bail with personal bond, two sureties, and conditions against tampering with evidence, seeking adjournments, and ensuring presence for case opening, charge framing, and recording o

Deewan Singh vs Stae of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:71785

¶2

Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9111 of 2024 Applicant :- Deewan Singh Opposite Party :- Stae Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Durgesh Kumar Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶4

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

¶5

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.63of 2024, under sections 394, 411, 413, 419, 420, 467, 468 of the I.P.C., Police Station-Kotwali Nanpara, District -Bahraich.

¶6

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 not named of F.I.R.. He further added that there is no independent public witness of the alleged recovery. He also submits that identification parade is not as per law. He submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 13.2.2024. He added that criminal antecedent of the applicant has been sufficiently explained. 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.

¶7

Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is not entitled for any relief as he has committed offence and there is credible and cogent evidence of the same.

¶8

Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that there is no independent public witness of the alleged recovery shown against the applicant, the applicant is languishing in jail since 13.2.2024; criminal antecedent of the applicant has been sufficiently explained; 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.

¶9

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

¶10

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.

¶11

Let the applicant - Deewan 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:-

¶12

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶13

(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 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;

¶14

(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

¶15

(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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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.

¶18

Order Date :- 24.10.2024

¶19

Anuj Singh

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Deewan Singh v. Stae of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deewan Singh v. Stae 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mayank Pal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Stamp and Registration Deptt. and 6 Others

Ubaid Ulla @ Mohd. Ubaid vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Shankar Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Dr. Jayash Nath Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Higher Education Lko. and Another

Sabhapati Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Satyam Tiwari vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko