Allowed

Sunil Kushwaha (Mithya) v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 Jun 2021BAIL/16958/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving assault and malicious damage to property, subject to specific conditions regarding attendance, cooperation, and non-intimidation of witnesses. The court observed a delayed FIR but expressed no opinion on the merit of the charging case.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties, subject to conditions for appearance at hearings, cooperation with the trial, and non-tampering with ev

Sunil Kushwaha (Mithya) Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16958 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Sunil Kushwaha (Mithya) Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Fakhruzzaman 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. 042 of 2021, under Sections 452, 385, 436, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Konch, District Jalaun.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to the FIR version on 24th January, 2021 in the night at about 11:30 p.m. applicant, Omprakash and one unknown person entered into the house of the informant and demanded Rs. 400/- for taking liquor, on refusal started maar peet and by abusing pored kerosene oil set on fire her thatch, on account of which she suffered loss of Rs. 6000/-. He submits that incident occurred on 24th January, 2021 and FIR has been lodged by delay of 14 days. He further submits that applicant and informant both belongs to poor class and they used to make sweet together, due to some money dispute he has been falsely implicated in the case. 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 criminal history of the applicant and he is languishing in jail since 09.02.2021.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by submitting that the incident had occurred on 24th January, 2021 and after incident applicant had assured to compensate the informant due to which delay occurred in lodging the FIR.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, applicant and informant were working together, delayed FIR and also perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for

¶10

bail, let the applicant- Sunil Kushwaha (Mithya) 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 :-

¶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 :- 11.6.2021 Israr

Sunil Kushwaha (Mithya) v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kushwaha (Mithya) 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

Akhand Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P.

Veer Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P.

Chhotelal Vs State of U.P.

Jayveer Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P.

Sandeep Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Rajat Singh @ Mintu Thakur Vs State of U.P.