Allowed

Pradeep Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Jun 2019BAIL/24381/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 24381 of 2019, the Court granted bail to Pradeep Kumar, an accused in a rape case (s. 376 IPC), citing the delayed FIR, old injury to the victim, and lack of prior criminal record as fit circumstances, without expressing an opinion on merit.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the sum required.

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

¶1

Court No. - 46

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24381 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bipin Kumar Tripathi,Chandan Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

This bail application has been preferred by the accusedapplicant, who is involved in Case Crime No. 20 of 2019 under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Mangalpur, District Kanpur Dehat.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. and he has been falsely implicated due to ulterior motive. Both the applicant and victim were having love affairs and on being them in compromising situation, present F.I.R. has been lodged with false and fabricated allegations. F.I.R.is delayed by 50 days. On medical hymen of the victim was found to be old torn and no visible injury was found on the internal or external part of the body of the victim. Further submission is that the applicant is in jail since 21.1.2019. He has no previous criminal history and if he is granted liberty, he will not misuse the same.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer and submitted that the victim has been raped by the applicant at the point of country made pistol, therefore, he may not be granted bail.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶10

Let the applicant Pradeep Kumar involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶11

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the

¶12

investigation or trial.

¶13

He shall cooperate in the trial bonafidely without seeking adjournments.

¶14

He shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶16

Order Date :- 17.6.2019 Ram Murti

Pradeep Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeep 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

Mohd. Amir Vs State of U.P.

Vinay Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Singh Vs State of U.P.

Mangla Pasi Vs State of U.P.

Todi and Another Vs State of U.P.

Sonu @ Prem Kumar Vs State of U.P.