Allowed

Kamlesh Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 May 2019BAIL/166/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted second bail to the applicant in a murder case after prosecution witnesses were declared hostile. Bail was granted subject to conditions, with a direction for the trial court to finalize the chargesheet expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail executing personal bond and two sureties with conditions against tampering witnesses and appearing in court; trial to conclude expeditiously.

Kamlesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 166 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Badan Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶6

Applicant has moved the present second bail application seeking bail in ST No.290 of 2014, Case Crime No. 111 of 2014 u/s 302, 504 IPC PS Kishni district Mainpuri. The first bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 25.1.2017.

¶7

Contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that subsequent to the rejection of the first bail application, two of the persons who were named in the FIR as eye witnesses being Yogendra Singh and Surendra Singh have been examined and they both have been declared as hostile. Copies of their statements have been annexed with the bail application. Contention is that there is no other eye witness to the incident. The first informant is not the eye witness. Contention is that applicant is in jail since 10.7.2014 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶8

Learned AGA has opposed the bail application of the applicant.

¶9

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and in view of the subsequent development, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out. However, the said prima facie view of this Court will not in any manner adversely affect the case of the prosecution.

¶10

The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant Kamlesh Kumar involved in the aforesaid case crime number 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:

¶12

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

¶13

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

¶14

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.

¶15

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.

¶16

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the learned counsel for the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.

¶17

However, it is directed that the aforesaid case crime number pending before the concerned court below be decided expeditiously, as early as possible in accordance with Section 309 Cr.P.C. and in view of principle as has been laid down in the recent judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vinod Kumar v. State of Punjab reported in 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another v. Union of India; 2017 (5) SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment.

¶18

It is made clear that in case the witnesses are not appearing, the concerned court is directed to initiate necessary coercive measure for ensuring their presence.

¶19

Order Date :- 3.5.2019 SP

Kamlesh Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamlesh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sushil Kumar Mishra @ Chhottan Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Neelu Shukla Vs State of U.P.

Shrawan Kumar @ Sarwan Kumar Nishad Vs State of U.P.

Subhash Chandra @ Bau Vs State of U.P.

Pinki Vs State of U.P.

Kaushlesh Kumar Upadhyay Vs State of U.P.