Allowed

Kartoos @ Chota @ Sandeep Nai v. State of Up

Allahabad HC15 Dec 2020BAIL/47298/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Allahabad allowed the bail application of Kartoos @ Chota @ Sandeep Nai, a co-accused in a rape case involving Sections 376-D IPC and 66-E IT Act, granting bail subject to specific conditions to ensure his presence and non-interference with witnesses during trial.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two local sureties, subject to undertaking not to tamper with evidence, remain present for all hearings, and cooperate with the trial.

Kartoos @ Chota @ Sandeep Nai Vs State of Up — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 36

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47298 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Kartoos @ Chota @ Sandeep Nai Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- R.P.S. Chauhan 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.201 of 2019, under Sections 342, 376-D, 395, 412 I.P.C. and Section 66-E The Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, Police Station Mau, District Chitrakoot.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that F.I.R. has been lodged under Sections 342,376-D, 395, 66-E and 506 I.P.C. against Vikki Garg, Kuldeep, D.J., applicant and two unknown persons. According to F.I.R. all the accused took away the victim and committed rape upon her. As per statement under Sections 164 Cr.P.C., Kuldeep, D.J. and Vikki committed rape upon her. She has not disclosed the name of the applicant. As per F.I.R. case of applicant is identical with the co-accused Vikki Garg, who has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 17.11.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.4541 of 2020. 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. It is next contended that there is no previous criminal history of the applicant and is languishing in jail since 02.11.2019.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, enlargement of co-accused on bail, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Kartoos @ Chota @ Sandeep Nai 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

¶10

conditions :-

¶11

(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.

¶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 for cancellation of bail.

¶17

Order Date :- 15.12.2020 Jitendra

Kartoos @ Chota @ Sandeep Nai v. State of Up

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kartoos @ Chota @ Sandeep Nai v. State of Up

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

Vijay Yadav Vs State of U.P.and Another

Arun Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vedpal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Naresh Kumar Paanchal Vs State of U.P.

Kamal @ Golu Vs State of U.P.

Dharmveer @ Dharma Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others