Allowed

Krishna Kant Rai v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC31 Oct 2019BAIL/45469/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 45469 of 2019 allowed bail to Krishna Kant Rai in a case under Sections 380, 411, 409, 120-B IPC, releasing him on personal bond and sureties with strict conditions to ensure presence during trial and deposit.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two local sureties subject to strict conditions regarding presence and undertaking not to seek adjournments.

Krishna Kant Rai Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45469 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Krishna Kant Rai Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashwani Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Krishna Kant Rai with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 229 of 2019, under Sections 380, 411, 409, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station- Chauri Chaura, DistrictGorakhpur , during pendency of trial.

¶7

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is not named in the FIR and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further argued that for the first time, name of the applicant surfaced in this matter in the confessional statement of coaccused. Nothing incriminating has been recovered either from the possession of applicant or on his pointing out. It is further argued that other co-accused-Pragat Kumar Mishra has already been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.09.2019 passed in Cri. Misc. Bail Application No. 38918 of 2019, copy of which order has been appended as Annexure no.6 of the affidavit accompanying the bail application and the case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant has no criminal history except the present case and is languishing in jail since 27.06.2019. In case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.

¶8

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail they will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Considering the material/evidence brought on record, the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶10

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶11

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶14

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶15

Order Date :- 31.10.2019 JK Yadav

Krishna Kant Rai v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Kant Rai 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kapil Deo Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Sajid Vs State of U.P.

Madan Prasad Jaiswal Vs State of U.P.

Upendra Kumar @ Chandu Vs State of U.P.

Sunil Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Jeetu Singh Vs State of U.P.