Prakash vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:48053

Court No. - 47

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10728 of 2025

Applicant :- Prakash Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

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

¶7

By means of this application, the applicant, Prakash who is involved in Case Crime No. 310 of 2023, under Sections 323, 304, 325 IPC, Police Station Sindhauli, District Shahjahanpur.

¶8

This is second bail application of the applicant. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on 24.07.2024 directing the trial court to conclude the trial against the applicant within period of one year.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that eight, out of fifteen prosecutions witnesses, has been examined but trial may take a long time. Co-accused Pankaj, who has been assigned main role has already been granted bail by order dated 16.12.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.48565 of 2023. Applicant has no criminal history. He is in jail since 04.07.2023 and he undertakes that he will not misuse liberty, if granted.

¶10

The prayer for bail has vehemently been opposed by learned A.G.A.

¶11

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India,

¶12

considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid 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 that :-

¶13

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶14

(ii) 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.

¶15

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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.

¶17

(v) 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. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant 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.

¶18

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶19

Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶20

Order Date :- 4.4.2025 Mini

¶21

Digitally signed by :- MINI KANAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Prakash v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prakash v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr. X through Guardianship of His Father Namely Kunwar Pal vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Salman vs State of U.P.

Mohsin Ansari vs State of U.P.

Santosh Singh vs State of U.P.

Vinod Jadaun vs State of U.P.

Arjun Singh vs State of U.P.