Allowed

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

Allahabad HC12 Nov 2024BAIL/9405/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was decided by the Hon'ble High Court at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench. The court granted bail to the applicant, Sunil, who was arrested in Case Crime No.194 of 2024 under various sections of the Bharatiya Nai Nat Sansad (BNS). The court noted the absence of independent witnesses and the applicant's lack of prior criminal history. The applicant was released on a personal bond and

What did the court decide?

The applicant, Sunil, was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to specific conditions regarding attendance and witness interference.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:74731

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9405 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Sunil Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjeev Kumar Shukla,Mahesh Chandra Shukla,Srees Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.194 of 2024, under Sections 352, 131, 326(G), 351(2) of BNS, Police Station Jamo, District Amethi.

¶9

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He submits that in fact the present applicant himself is victimized and he has not committed any offence and there is no cogent piece of evidence and there is no independent public eye witness of the incident. He further submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 22.07.2024 and in case, the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶10

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the serious allegations have been levelled against the applicant in the First Information Report and there is ample evidence against him, as such he is not entitled for bail.

¶11

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it transpires that there is no independent public eye witness of the incident; there is no previous criminal history of the applicant; the applicant is languishing in jail since 22.07.2024 and he has undertaken that he will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted, and would co-operate in the trial proceedings.

¶12

Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of

¶13

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 case of bail.

¶14

Let the applicant- Sunil 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 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;

¶17

(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

¶18

(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.

¶19

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.

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 12.11.2024 kkv/

¶22

Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil 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

Smt. Asha Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. S.I.T. Lko

Pawan Kumar and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Sharwan Kumar vs Chairperson Institute of Tool Room Training U.P. and Spl. Secy., Insti. Deve. Deptt. and Others

Matloob @ Pappu and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

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

Virendra Kumar Lodh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow