Awadhesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 90

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32453 of 2020

Applicant :- Awadhesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant-Awadhesh Kumar with a prayer to release him on bail in Complaint Case No.666 of 2015, registered under Sections 363, 376(2) Dha I.P.C., Police Station Pashchim Sharira, District Kaushambi during pendency of the trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that complainant/victim is wife of the applicant, this fact has been admitted by the victim in the F.I.R. dated 11.07.2015, lodged by complainant/victim, in Case Crime No.0147 of 2015 registered under Sections 354(A), 323 and 504 I.P.C.; the complainant/victim in complaint dated 20.05.2015, against the applicant and in-laws, has not disclosed that she is wife of the applicant; she alleged in the complaint that the applicant abducted the complainant on gun point and committed rape on her. It is further submitted that the complaint filed by the complainant/victim is delayed and there is no plausible explanation for the same; complainant earlier lodged F.I.R. against the in-laws (those are accused in the present case) under Sections 354(A), 323, 504 I.P.C. in which after investigation, Investigating Authority submitted final report. It is next submitted that the applicant lodged an F.I.R. dated 19.09.2015 against other persons, who took away the wife of the applicant, under Sections 406, 323 and 504 I.P.C.; the whole story narrated in the F.I.R. are false and fabricated; the complainant/victim lodged the present complaint only to make pressure and materialize the matter; statement recorded under Sections 200 Cr.P.C. and 202 Cr.P.C. does not disclose any offence against the applicant. He further contended that when applicant said the victim to leave relation with Sunil Kumar, being aggrieved with this, she lodged the present complaint. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. It is next submitted that there is no possibility of fleeing away of the applicant from the judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is also contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 12.08.2020.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant oppose the bail prayer of the applicant.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by

¶10

learned counsel for the parties and the statement of the victim under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., medical report regarding age of the victim and evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused and the view laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant- Awadhesh Kumar, who is involved in Complaint Case No.666 of 2015, registered under Sections 363, 376(2) Dha I.P.C., Police Station Pashchim Sharira, District Kaushambi, 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. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified :-

¶12

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶13

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶14

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶15

The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed. 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.

¶16

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

¶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 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.

¶19

Order Date :- 15.10.2020 Nitin Verma

Awadhesh Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Awadhesh Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Alok Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Nawal Vs State of U.P.

Sant Raj Vs State of U.P.

Haidar Vs State of U.P.

Nafees Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P.