‘Give Complete Details Of Criminal Antecedents Of Applicants In Bail Orders’: Allahabad High Court Directs Trial Courts

Tag: 上海品茶网JJH

first_imgNews Updates’Give Complete Details Of Criminal Antecedents Of Applicants In Bail Orders’: Allahabad High Court Directs Trial Courts Sparsh Upadhyay20 Dec 2020 8:41 PMShare This – xThe Allahabad High Court on Monday (14th December) directed the Courts below to “give a complete details of the criminal antecedent(s), if any, of the applicant(s)/accused before them or record the fact that there are no criminal antecedent(s) of the said person(s) if there are none.” The Bench of Justice Samit Gopal further observed, “Although the criminal antecedents of the…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginThe Allahabad High Court on Monday (14th December) directed the Courts below to “give a complete details of the criminal antecedent(s), if any, of the applicant(s)/accused before them or record the fact that there are no criminal antecedent(s) of the said person(s) if there are none.” The Bench of Justice Samit Gopal further observed, “Although the criminal antecedents of the accused are not the sole and decisive factor for decision of bail applications but the same needs to be considered while deciding an application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. as per the legislative mandate of Section 437 Cr.P.C.” The matter before the Court The Bench was hearing a regular bail application filed by the applicant Uday Pratap, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 12 of 2020, under Sections 364, 302, 201, 120B and 34 I.P.C. The Counsel for the State argued that as per C.C.T.V. footage, the applicant (Uday Pratap) was seen moving out from the place where the deceased and other co-accused persons were consuming liquor. It was submitted that the applicant was also seen together with the deceased having liquor by Dinesh, the younger brother of the deceased. It was also argued that all the accused persons in a clandestine manner gave poisonous substance to the deceased as a result of which he died, which also gets fortified from the report of chemical analyst from which poison has been found in the viscera. Importantly, the A.G.A. refuted the averment of criminal antecedents of the applicant and argued that the said averment is a false averment made in the affidavit filed in support of bail application. He argued that the applicant is involved in seven other criminal cases and even history sheet has been opened. The details of involvement of the applicant in seven other criminal cases were placed before the Court. Court’s observations After having heard Counsels for the parties and perusing the records, the Court said, “It is apparent that criminal antecedents of the applicant have not been disclosed.” In view of the fact that in the viscera report, presence of Organo Chloro insecticide and Ethyl Alcohol poison was found and long criminal antecedents of the applicant, the Court did not think it to be a fit case to release the applicant on bail. Further, the Court said, “Not only in this case but in many other cases it is seen that there is an averment made that the applicant/accused is not involved in any other criminal case before this Court. The order rejecting bail by the courts below is silent about the criminal antecedents of the applicant/accused but on the basis of instructions of learned Additional Government Advocate of this Court or on the basis of instruction of learned counsels for the first informant; it transpires that the applicant/accused has previous criminal history.” The Court also said, “When the learned counsels are countered with the same it becomes embarrassing for them and is also an impediment in deciding the said bail application due to the non-disclosure of the criminal history of the accused.” Thus, the Court directed the courts below in the State of Uttar Pradesh “to attend the issue of criminal antecedent(s) of accused persons while deciding bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C. and give a complete detail of the criminal antecedent(s), if any, of the applicant(s)/accused before them or record the fact that there are no criminal antecedent(s) of the said person(s) if there are none.” The Registrar General was directed to ensure compliance of the order “in its true spirit and submit a report of compliance before this Court by 29.1.2021.” The matter has been listed for further hearing on 29th January 2021 for further orders. In related news, the Rajasthan High Court on Wednesday (25th November) directed all the Trial Courts in the State to give the complete details of the antecedents (of the Bail Applicant), if any, and also record that there are no antecedents of the accused person in case of none being there. The Bench of Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati issued the above-said direction while hearing the Bail Application of an Accused who had no criminal antecedents. Case title – Uday Pratap @ Dau v. State of U.P. [Criminal Misc. Bail application No. – 43160 of 2020] Click Here To Download OrderRead OrderSubscribe to LiveLaw, enjoy Ad free version and other unlimited features, just INR 599 Click here to Subscribe. All payment options available.loading….Next Storylast_img read more