Allowed

Kuldeep v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Jan 2018BAIL/1932/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court considered a bail application whereby the applicant claimed false implication and lack of independent eyewitness corroboration. The court found reasonable apprehension of witness tampering and prima facie satisfaction of the charge prompting release.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with a personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions including attending trial and not tampering with witnesses.

Kuldeep Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 23

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1932 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Kuldeep Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Ali Imam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Syed Ali Imam, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his prayer for bail submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that applicant has no concern with the commission of present offence. It is further submitted that there is no any independent eyewitness who could corroborate the recovery. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 01.10.2017. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and reformative theory of punishment, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶9

Let the applicant Kuldeep involved in Case Crime No. 555 of 2017, under Section 379, 411 I.P.C., Police Station Phase II, Noida, District Gautam Buddh Nagar be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶10

The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶11

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶12

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶13

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶14

Order Date :- 18.1.2018 Arti Sharma

Kuldeep v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuldeep v. State of U.P.

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

Similar cases

Shaukeen Vs State of U.P.

Mahak Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ravikant Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Manpal Vs State of U.P.

Sarita Vs State of U.P.

Kuldeep Vs State of U.P.