Allowed

Jitendra Kumar Shukla v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Sept 2019BAIL/18584/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In the absence of personal appearance by counsel due to a strike, the applicant arguing via pairokar was granted bail in a U.P. Public Examination Act and IPC case. The court allowed the plea ensuring conditions to prevent tampering or influence of witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail subject to executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties under specified conditions including not tampering with evidence.

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

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18584 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Jitendra Kumar Shukla Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vibhuti Narayan Singh,Uday Shankar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

As there is strike of lawyers, no one has appeared on behalf of the applicant to argue the bail application. However, Manoj Kumar Shukla, who is also pairokar of the affidavit accompanying the bail application has appeared in person.

¶6

This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Jitendra Kumar Shukla in connection with Case Crime No.0032 of 2019, under Sections 4/5/7/8/10 U.P. Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1998 & 409, 419, 420 I.P.C., P.S. Bansdih, District Ballia.

¶7

Heard Sri Manoj Kumar Shukla, on behalf of the applicant in person and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

It has been argued that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. He submitted that the co-accused have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide both orders dated 04.07.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.18545 of 2019 (Shashi Kant Shukla) and 14705 of 2019 (Virendra Shukla). He claims parity. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 27.02.2019 and in case, he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea. He does not dispute the factum of parity.

¶10

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶11

Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶12

Let the applicants Jitendra Kumar Shukla involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 9.9.2019 R./

Jitendra Kumar Shukla v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Kumar Shukla 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

Jitendra Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P.

Balram Singh Vs State of U.P.

Anand Raj @ Nandan Vs State of U.P.

Abrar Vs State of U.P.

Shailendra Pratap Singh Alias Sanjay Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ram Ashish Singh Vs State of U.P.