Allowed

Ravi Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Feb 2018BAIL/3513/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh, J., allowed bail in a police firing case (Section 307 IPC). The Court noted no injuries on police personnel, lack of independent witnesses, and lengthy custody, finding it fit for bail subject to conditions against tampering and harassment.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail by executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties, subject to five specific conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 22

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3513 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Ravi Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Badan,Asheesh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit has been filed today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. According to the prosecution case the F.I.R. was lodged against Ravi Kumar Akram alleging that they have made firing on Police personnel but they saved themselves; on 26.07.2017 they were arrested by the Police with the recovery of some illegal firearm, cartridges and motorcycle from their possession.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case; this is Police firing case but no injury was found on the body of any of the Police personnel; there is no independent witness against the applicant; the criminal history of five cases against the applicant have been explained; in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial; he is in jail since 27.07.2017 (more than six month).

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and admitted that the criminal history of five cases against the applicant have been explained. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶9

Let the applicant Ravi Kumar involved in the Case Crime No. 854 of 2017, under Section 307 I.P.C., P.S. Khatouli, District Muzaffarnagar be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶10

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶11

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

¶12

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

¶13

iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission, of which applicant is suspected.

¶14

v) The applicant shall not directly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade the applicant from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 8.2.2018 A. Tripathi

Ravi Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Kumar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kanti Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Akram and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashu Yadav @ Aashish Vs State of U.P. and Another

Saurabh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Anwar Vs State of U.P.

Rameshwar Vs State of U.P.