Allowed

Anit Kumar @ Jhandu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Sept 2018BAIL/26148/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application seeks release for Anit Kumar charged under Section 307 IPC. The court granted bail by personal bond with two sureties, noting the injury was on a non-vital part and the accused had no prior record, though witnesses may be tampered with.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding cooperation and non-tampering.

Anit Kumar @ Jhandu Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 55

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26148 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Anit Kumar @ Jhandu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amitrana,Deepak Kumar Pal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Amit Kumar

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Amit Kumar, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I appearing for the State.

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of this Court towards annexure-2 to the affidavit accompanying this bail application which is injury report of the injured sustained injury on his hand which is non vital part of the body. 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 25.5.2018. It has been pointed out that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶7

Learned counsel for the complainant as well as 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

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the

¶10

applicant Anit Kumar @ Jhandu involved in Case Crime No.141 of 2018, under Section 307 I.P.C., Police Station Nagina, District Bijnor 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.

¶11

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

¶12

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶16

Order Date :- 6.9.2018 Dev/-

Anit Kumar @ Jhandu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anit Kumar @ Jhandu 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

Pankaj Singh Vs State of U.P.

Vishal Singh Vs State of U.P.

Akbal Jahan Vs State of U.P.

Vijendra Vs State of U.P.

Sabir Khan Vs State of U.P.

Vikash Sharma @ Vikky Thekedar Vs State of U.P.