Allowed

Jitendra Kumar and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Sept 2019BAIL/27329/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was disposed of during a strike of lawyers by the applicant's pairokar. The court found it a fit case for bail considering parity with a co-accused already on bail, despite noting the gravity of the offences under the Excise Act and IPC.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail by executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each with conditions against tampering and re-offending.

Jitendra Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27329 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Jitendra Kumar And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- D.K.Ojha 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 applicants to argue the bail application. However, Santosh Bihari, 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 applicants Jitendra Kumar and Shailendra Kumar in connection with Case Crime No.91 of 2019, under Sections 60/63 Excise Act & Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Linepar, District Firozabad.

¶7

Heard Sri Santosh Bihari, on behalf of the applicants in person and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

It has been argued that the applicants are quite innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. He submitted that the co-accused Jay Kumar has been admitted to the concession of bail by another Bench of this Court by order dated 08.08.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.32043 of 2019 and the role assigned to the applicant is similar to the role of the other coaccused, who have already been enlarged on bail. He submitted that there is no public witness of the alleged recovery. He submitted that all the offences are triable by the court of Magistrate. He submitted that the applicant are is languishing in jail since 09.06.2019 and in case, they are released on bail they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea. However, learned A.G.A. 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, considering that the co-accused, Jay Kumar has already been enlarged on bail, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶11

Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶12

Let the applicants Jitendra Kumar and Shailendra Kumar 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 applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

v) The applicants 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 :- 6.9.2019 R./

Jitendra Kumar and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Kumar and Another 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

Baby Aksha Vs State of U.P.

Javed Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Pritam Singh Vs Gurmit Singh and Others

Balram Singh Vs State of U.P.

Anand Raj @ Nandan Vs State of U.P.

Anand Raj @ Nandan Vs State of U.P.