Allowed

Jaun Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC8 Oct 2021BA1/2220/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Nainital disposed of three regular bail applications filed by Jaun Singh for offences under Sections 380, 457, 411 and 34 IPC. The court allowed bail, directing release upon personal bond and two sureties, subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the same amount.

Jaun Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand — Cheating and Forgery | Uttarakhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶2

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

¶3

8^TH OCTOBER, 2021

¶4

FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2220 of 2021

¶5

Between: Jaun Singh S/o Shri Munshi Lal. …Applicant and State of Uttarakhand. …Respondent With FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2223 of 2021 Between: Jaun Singh S/o Shri Munshi Lal. …Applicant and State of Uttarakhand. …Respondent With FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2226 of 2021 Between: Jaun Singh S/o Shri Munshi Lal. …Applicant and State of Uttarakhand. …Respondent

¶6

¶7

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Mani Kumar. Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned A.G.A. assisted by Mr. P.S. Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for the State.

¶8

Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

¶9

These three bail applications are being decided by this common order because these bail applications arise from a common recovery memo dated 24.11.2020.

¶10

The Bail Application No.2220 of 2021 has been filed for regular bail in connection with FIR No.659 of 2020 registered with Police Station Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar for the offence under Sections 380, 457 and 411 of IPC.

¶11

The Bail Application No.2223 of 2021 has been filed for regular bail in connection with FIR No.671 of 2020 registered with Police Station Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar for the offence under Sections 380, 457 and 411 of IPC.

¶12

The Bail Application No.2226 of 2021 has been filed for regular bail in connection with FIR No.660 of 2020 registered with Police Station Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar for the offence under Sections 380, 457, 411 and 34 of IPC.

¶13

Heard Mr. Mani Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned A.G.A. assisted by Mr. P.S. Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for the State.

¶14

¶15

Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, the learned A.G.A. for the State opposed these bail applications and submitted that in these three matters, FIRs were lodged by the concerned informants to the effect that some household articles and Jewellery were stolen and during the investigation, the said stolen property were recovered on 24.11.2020, by the Badaun police at the instance of the present applicant.

¶16

Mr. Mani Kumar, the learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been implicated in these matters. These FIRs were lodged against the unknown persons. Nothing was recovered at the instance of the applicant; the alleged recoveries were planted; no public witness was secured before or at the time of the alleged recoveries. The said offences are triable by the Magistrate. The applicant has not been convicted in any case. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

¶17

Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, the learned A.G.A. fairly conceded that the applicant has not been convicted in any case.

¶18

Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of an individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused persons in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.

¶19

Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period,

¶20

¶21

therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merit of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserve bail at this stage.

¶22

These bail applications are allowed.

¶23

Let the applicant, namely, Jaun Singh be released on bail on their executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, in the aforesaid each case, to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶24

i) The applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

¶25

ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case.

¶26

It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.

¶27

ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

¶28

Dt: 8^th October, 2021 Neha

Jaun Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaun Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nawab Ali Alias Nawab Ahmad Vs State of Uttarakhand

Prakash Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand

Nanhey Vs State of Uttarakhand

Km. Sunita Arya Vs State Of Uttarakhand and Another

Subhash Vs State of Uttarakhand

Jaun Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand