Allowed

Kuldeep Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Oct 2020BAIL/24961/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allows bail toapplicant Kuldeep Kumar ina dowry death case involving IPC Sections 498-A and 304-B, noting cause of death likely suicide and parity with a co-accused already released, subject to standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence, cooperating in trial, and appearing on dates fixed for evidence, cha

Kuldeep Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 36

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24961 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Kuldeep Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Narayan Singh,Pankaj Kumar Mishra

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajay Singh Sengar,Vijay Singh Sengar

¶5

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Sri Ajay Singh Sengar, learned counsel for the informant filed counter affidavit is taken on record and submits that bail application of other co-accused-Prabhudayal (father-in-law)has been allowed by this Court vide order dated 7.8.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 16937 of 2020.

¶8

Heard Sri Satyendra Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the informant and perused the material on record.

¶9

The present bail application has been filed by the applicantbrother-in-law (Devar) with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.11 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Lavedi, District Etawah.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that cause of death could not be ascertained; viscera has been preserved; witnesses of Panchayatnama stated that the deceased consumed poisonous substance; the husband of the deceased had taken her for medical treatment; it is a case of suicide; the applicant has not reported criminal antecedent; he has been falsely implicated in the present case and has no role in the incident and languishing in jail since 03.03.2020 and the applicant undertakes that if he enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in the trial. Co-accused-Prabhudayal (father-in-law) has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 7.8.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 16937 of 2020 and the case of the applicant is similar to the case of coaccused, who has already been enlarged on bail by this Court, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact and submitted that the case of the applicant is similar to the case of coaccused-Prabhudayal (father-in-law) who has already been enlarged on bail.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, nature of allegation, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Kuldeep 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 :-

¶13

(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 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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

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

¶18

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the

¶19

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.

¶20

Order Date :- 5.10.2020 OP

Kuldeep Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuldeep 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of U.P. vs Pravesh Chaurasiya

State of U.P. vs Pravesh Chaurasiya

Nagar Swasthaya Adhikari Nagar Nigam Agra vs Durg Pal

Rama Kant Singh Vs State of U.P.

Nathu Ram Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh Vs State of U.P.