Allowed

Ashok Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Feb 2019BAIL/4355/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under CrPC, the High Court of Uttar Pradesh, after hearing counsel and reviewing the record, granted bail to the applicant named in an FIR involving criminal homicide and affray, citing his identity with co-accused who had already been released on bail.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail under S. 319 CrPC on personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions for cooperation and non-tampering.

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

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4355 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Mishra,Dinesh Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for applicant is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

Learned counsel for applicant contended that applicant has been falsely implicated in F.I.R. dated 16.8.2018 lodged by Kamlesh Kumar against 6 named and 10-11 unnamed persons including applicant; that as per averments made in F.I.R. role of causing firearm injury to deceased Ramlakhan has been assigned to co-accused Lavkush @ Raghunandan and common and general role has been assigned to applicant, and co-accused persons of causing injuries to Shiv Prasad, Rakesh, Shiv Nandan and first informant; that none of above injured persons sustained any grievous injury on vital party of body, which may be considered to be dangerous to their life; that real fact is that first informant and his associates assaulted on applicant and his family members due to dispute over Kharanja and committed murder of his Chacha Kallu @ Iswar Sharan and caused injuries to as many as 4 persons regarding which F.I.R. was lodged by accused Munna @ Bharti Sharan in Case Crime No.314 of 2018; that applicant may not be considered to be aggressor rather aggressors were first informant and his associates; that case of applicant is identical with co-accused Munna @ Bharti Sharan, Ambika Prasad, Dilip Kumar and Ram Prakash have been granted bail by other Benches of this Court vide orders dated 2.1.2019, 9.1.2019 and 11.1.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.48988 of 2018, 615 of 2019 and 1489 of 2019, copies of which have been produced for perusal and are taken on record; that applicant has explained allegations of criminal history in

¶8

paragraph 3 on words in supplementary affidavit; that applicant is not a previous convict and has no criminal history, and the criminal history which had been against him does not relate to him rather relates to co-accused Lavkush @ Raghunandan; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 17.08.2018.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail.

¶10

Upon hearing learned counsel and perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment; grant of bail to co-accused as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicant Ashok Kumar be released on bail in Case Crime No.0313 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 7 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1934, P.S. Sarai AKil, District Kaushambi, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶12

(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.

¶13

(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶14

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶15

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned

¶16

above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶17

Order Date :- 5.2.2019 VS

Ashok Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Karan Jaiswal Vs State of U.P.

Tanvir Alam Vs State of U.P.

Vikal Alias Nikhil Vs State of U.P.

Goldee Alias Lalit Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Kela Devi Vs State of U.P.

Sattan Vs State of U.P.