Allowed

Lakhvindar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 May 2019BAIL/9898/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail to an applicant implicated in offence under Sections 272, 273 IPC and Section 60 Excise Act. Hon'ble Umesh Kumar, J. noted prosecution's failure to file counter affidavit and ordered release on personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

The applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount subject to specified conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 22

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9898 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Lakhvindar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Akbar Shah Alam Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.

¶5

Despite sufficient time prosecution has failed to file any counter affidavit.

¶6

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

¶7

This bail application has been moved on behalf of accusedapplicant- Lakhvindar, who is involved in case crime no. 764 of 2018 under Section 272, 273 I.P.C., and 60 Excise Act, Police Station- Jhinjhana, District-Shamli.

¶8

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case; that there is no independent witness against the applicant. It is further submitted that without obtaining any report of the Forensic Science Laboratory or any other expert opinion Section 272 of the IPC has been slapped upon the accused-applicant. Applicant is languishing in jail since 30.10.2018. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but did not dispute the factual submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without touching the merits of the case in my opinion the accused applicant is entitled for bail.

¶11

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

¶12

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence, shall cooperate in investigation or trial and shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶13

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.

¶14

Order Date :- 22.5.2019//Fhd.

Lakhvindar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lakhvindar 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

Sahdev Vs State of U.P.

Shiv Prasad Vs State of U.P.

Shiv Bhushan Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. and Others

Rohit Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Akram and Another Vs State of U.P.

Rajveer Vs State of U.P.