Allowed

Rinku Alias Ram Lal @ Vimal Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Feb 2021BAIL/14432/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by the applicant in a murder case. After hearing arguments and examining the record, the court was satisfied that no convincing material indicated a possibility of tampering with evidence. Consequently, the applicant was released on bail subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail furnishing personal bond and two sureties with immutability of bail conditions.

Rinku Alias Ram Lal @ Vimal Kumar Vs State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14432 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Rinku Alias Ram Lal @ Vimal Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Yadav,Mohammad Zakir,Rajesh Kumar Pandey,Shashi Kant Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Hemant Sharma,Upendra Kumar Mishra

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant- Rinku @ Ram Lal @ Vimal Kumar , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 737 of 2017, under Section(s) 302, 120-B I.P.C., registered at P.S.- Sikandarabad, DistrictBulandshahr.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant and only general allegations have been made. It is further submitted that F.I.R. was lodged against unknown persons and the applicant has been falsely implicated. Co-accused Sanjay @ Mohit Kumar, in his statement, has disclosed the participation of applicant in the alleged offence. It is further submitted that co-accused, Surendra @ Tarbabu, Pawan @ Pawnesh and Kanhaiya @ Rajendra, have already been enlarged on bail. The applicant has no previous criminal antecedents as stated in para-22 of the affidavit and is in jail since 17.11.2017. If he is released on bail he will never misuse the liberty and will cooperate with trial.

¶8

Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and pointed out that the applicant, in his confessional statement, has himself confessed that he had fired on the deceased. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Let the applicant- Rinku @ Ram Lal @ Vimal Kumar, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶11

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶12

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶13

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he/she shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his/her presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him/her, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.

¶15

(V) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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/her in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him/her under Section 229-A IPC.

¶16

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶17

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶18

The bail application is allowed.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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.

¶22

Order Date :- 23.2.2021 Vandana

Rinku Alias Ram Lal @ Vimal Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rinku Alias Ram Lal @ Vimal 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bal Chandra Vs State of U.P.

Badaku Alias Manish Vs State of U.P.

Devendra Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P.

Amarjeet Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Abdul Rahim Vs State of U.P.

Sayed Kamar Khushnoor Alias Sheru Vs State of U.P.