Allowed

Vineet @ Sumit Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Dec 2020BAIL/11597/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted bail to the applicant,UIN No. 11597/2020, in a charge arising from Co. Crime No. 220/2019, under Sections 392, 376D, and others of IPC. The release was conditioned upon furnishing sureties and complying with specific undertakings regarding witness tampering and appearance in court.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties subject to specific undertakings regarding presence and conduct.

Vineet @ Sumit Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 36

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11597 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Vineet @ Sumit Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ray Sahab Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 220 of 2019, under Sections 392, 376D, 386, 328, 411, 506 IPC, P.S. Jhunsi, District Prayagraj.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that identically placed co-accused Amit Pasi @ Amit Kumar Bhartiya has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 20.12.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 57647 of 2019. He further submits that as per FIR, applicant & two named and 6-7 unnamed persons abducted the victim. He also submits that actually the victim was a consenting party with the co-accused Sagar. He next submits that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is languishing in jail since 27.02.2019.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but has not disputed the aforesaid fact.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, enlargement of co-accused on bail and also perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Vineet @ Sumit Kumar 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 will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will

¶11

cooperate with the trial. The applicant 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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his 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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶16

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. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground of cancellation of bail.

¶17

Order Date :- 9.12.2020 MAA/-

Vineet @ Sumit Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vineet @ Sumit 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

Smt. Guddi Devi Vs State of U.P.

Sikandar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nikhil Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shudhir Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahatam Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Maqsood Ali @ Bhayyan Kunjada Vs State of U.P.and Another