Allowed

Rinku and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC22 Jan 2020BAIL/3268/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application filed by three accused applicants. The High Court, without commenting on the merits of the prosecution case, allowed the bail application and ordered their release upon furnishing of a bond and sureties subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicants on bail upon furnishing a personal bond, two sureties each, and executing an undertaking subject to specified conditions.

Rinku and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3268 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Rinku And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶5

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

¶6

Accused-applicants, involved in Case Crime No.832 of 2017, under Sections 323, 504, 354, 452, 506 I.P.C. and 7/8 P.O.C.S.O. Act, Police Station Jagdishpura, District Agra, applied for bail.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants submit that applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case by the Informant. They have committed no offence. Entire prosecution story is false and fake. FIR has been lodged after ten days of incident without any explanation. Minor victim did not make any statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. In statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. she stated that no wrong act has been done with her. There is no medical of any victim. Co-ccused Dhara Singh has already been granted bail by the trial Court itself. Applicants are in jail since 13.11.2019 and having no criminal history against them. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicants fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicants are enlarged on bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Due to heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no possibility of early conclusion of the trial.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but did not disputed the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, rival contention of learned counsel for the parties, detention of applicants in jail, severity of punishment in case of conviction, statement of victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C., delay in FIR, allegation made against the applicants and without commenting upon the merit of the case, applicants deserves bail.

¶10

Accordingly, bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let applicants Rinku, Rahul and Awadhesh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime on their furnishing a personal

¶12

bond and two reliable sureties each and filing an undertaking to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶13

The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶14

The applicants shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for charge, evidence when the witnesses are present in the court, statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and argument.

¶15

During trial, they shall not indulge in any criminal activities or case.

¶16

In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶17

Order Date :- 22.1.2020 I.A.Siddiqui

Rinku and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rinku and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Mahesh Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Veer Alias Shera Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Waris Vs State of U.P.

Imran Khan Vs State of U.P.

Shriram Vs State of U.P.

Pramod Vs State of U.P.