Allowed

Alok Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Oct 2020BAIL/22645/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application allowed. Court released the applicant on bail by personal bond due to lockdown preventing surety arrangement, fixing conditions for trial attendance and authorizing trial court to take coercive action for abuse of liberty.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Alok Kumar released on bail by furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount, subject to multiple conditions of trial attendance and conduct.

Alok Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 34

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22645 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Alok Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Keshari Nandan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Raja Ram Kushwaha

¶4

Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Raja Ram Kushwana, Advocate, appearing for informant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State. As per prosecution case, applicant is alleged to have enticed the victim, aged about 19 years; as per her statement under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., she went of her own and accompanied the victim to Noida and stayed with him for eight days; victim is known to the applicant. It is urged by learned counsel for the applicant that there is contradiction in the statement under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.; relationship is consensual; applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. It is further submitted that the applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent and he is languishing in jail since 14.03.2020, there is no likelihood of early disposal of trial and the applicant undertakes that if enlarged on bail, he will never misuse his liberty and will co-operate in the trial.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶7

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶8

Let the applicant Alok Kumar, involved in Case Crime No. 88 of 2020, under Sections 366, 376, 452 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Sumerpur, District Hamirpur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶9

(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.

¶10

(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.

¶11

(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,

¶12

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

(v) The party shall file computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶15

(vi) The computer generated copy of the order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶16

(vii) 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.

¶17

In view of the extraordinary situation prevailing in the State due to Covid-19, the directions of this Court dated 6.4.2020 passed in Public Interest Litigation No. 564 of 2020 (In re vs. State of U.P.), shall also be complied.

¶18

The order reads thus:

¶19

"Looking to impediments in arranging sureties because of lockdown, while invoking powers under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, we deem it appropriate to order that all the accused-applicants whose bail applications came to be allowed on or after 15th March, 2020 but have not been released due to non-availability of sureties as a consequence to lockdown may be released on executing personal bond as ordered by the Court or to the satisfaction of the jail authorities where such accused is imprisoned, provided the accused-applicants undertakes to furnish required sureties within a period of one month from the date of his/her actual release."

¶20

Order Date :- 15.10.2020

¶21

P. Sri.

Alok Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alok 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

Samar Quraishi Vs State of U.P.

Minhaaj and and Another Vs State of U.P.

Karaivan Youon Mariyan Vs State of U.P.

Bablu Gaur @ Gobardhan Vs State of U.P.

Bhim Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shavej Vs State of U.P.