Allowed

Naveen Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC26 Nov 2020ABAIL/8251/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving alleged offences under the IPC and U.P. Excise Act. The applicant must furnish a personal bond with sureties and comply with specific conditions to ensure fair trial conduct.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties subject to specific conditions.

Naveen Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8251 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Naveen Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Singh,Ajay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶6

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Naveen Kumar, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 447 of 2019, under Section- 419, 420, 467, 468 IPC and Section 103/104 Trade Mark Act and Section 54, 64 Copy Right Act and Section 60 U.P. Excise Act, Police StationKasya, District- Kushinagar, during pendency of trial.

¶7

The applicant has been implicated for offence under U.P. Excise Act. The allegations of violence of Trade Mark Act and Copy Right Act have also been alleged.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. False recovery has been shown from him. The offence alleged is triable by Magistrate. He has no criminal history to his credit. The applicant has definite apprehension that he may be arrested by the police any time.

¶9

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant, but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.

¶10

Hence the applicant is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98 and order dated 22.05.2020 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.2609 of 2020 . The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶11

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case

¶12

and considering the nature of accusations and his antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

¶13

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

¶14

The applicant shall not leave India during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶15

The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.

¶16

That 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶17

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.

¶18

In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the trial Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)2020 SCC Online SC 98 .

¶19

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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

The party shall file computer generated copy of such

¶21

order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶22

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶23

Order Date :- 26.11.2020 Ruchi Agrahari

Naveen Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naveen 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Brij Bihari Singh Vs State of U.P.

Zafarullah @ Mohd. Zafarullah and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Brajpal Vs State of U.P.and Another

Nishchal Rathor Vs State of U.P.

Kuldeep Singh Vs State of U.P.

Shailendra Prasad Dubey @ Shailendra and 9 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another