Santosh Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Feb 2025BAIL/3432/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail granted to repeat offender (46 cases) considering jail overcrowding and Article 21; reliance on Manish Sisodia (2024) SC; conditions imposed including bi-monthly police reporting and trial attendance undertakings.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Santosh Singh released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in like amount, subject to six conditions including reporting to police station, undertaking not to seek adjournments, presence at trial, and verification of identity/sureties ¶¶13-¶22

Santosh Singh vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:118374

¶2

Court No. - 47

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3432 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Santosh Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Kumar Tripathi,Pankaj Kumar Dwivedi 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.

¶7

Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A is taken on record.

¶8

This is second bail application of the applicant.

¶9

First bail application of the applicant was rejected for want of prosecution on 13.11.2024.

¶10

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is in jail since 30.01.2023 for committing the offence of theft and recovery of stolen goods. The applicant has criminal history of 46 cases explained in supplementary affidavit filed by counsel for the applicant.

¶11

On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶12

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant, Santosh Singh, involved in Case Crime No. 29 of 2023, under Sections- 379, 411, 413, 414, 34 IPC, Police Station- Jahanaganj, District- Azamgarh, be released on bail on

¶14

his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶15

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

¶16

(ii) The applicant will report his presence before the Police Station- Nizamabad, District- Azamgarh, in the first week of every second month after he is released on bail and till the conclusion of trial.

¶17

(iii) 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.

¶18

(iv) 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.

¶19

(v) 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.

¶20

(vi) 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.

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

Order Date :- 21.7.2025 Rohit

¶24

Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Santosh Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Singh 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Janam Chauhan vs State of U.P.

Shimbhu Dayal vs State of U.P. and Another

Pramod Kumar Singh Alias Pramod Kumar vs State of U.P.

Jaiprakash Mishra @ Chhotkau vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravi Upadhyay vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Krishna Ghosh vs State of U.P.