Allowed

Ajay Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Sept 2019BAIL/35182/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allows a bail application for Ajay Kumar in a criminal case involving Sections 379, 411, and 482 IPC. The court considered the lack of public witnesses to the recovery of a motorcycle, the bail grant to a co-accused, and the applicant's cooperation, finding him fit for bail.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on personal bond with two sureties under specified conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35182 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar,Jayant Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.

¶6

This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Ajay Kumar in connection with Case Crime No.1630 of 2016, under Sections 379, 411, 482 I.P.C., P.S. Kavinagar, District Ghaziabad.

¶7

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. He submitted that as per the allegation of the first information report one motor-cycle was recovered from the applicant. He submitted that there is no public witness of the alleged recovery. He further submitted that coaccused Anand @ Nandu has been admitted to the concession of bail by the learned trial court vide order dated 20.05.2019. He further submitted that previous criminal history of the applicant has been explained in the bail application. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 25.03.2019 and in case, he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea. However, learned A.G.A. does not dispute the factum of parity.

¶9

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 and also the fact that the co-accused Anand @ Nandu has been admitted to the concession of bail by this Court, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶10

Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant Ajay 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:

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 13.9.2019

¶18

R./

Ajay Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay 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

Nanak Chand and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.

Ajab Narayan Pandey @ Munna Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Suraj Vs State of U.P.

Akhilesh Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Siyaram Vs State of U.P.

Subhash Vs State of U.P.