Allowed

Kripal and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Jun 2021BAIL/17483/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court passed a bail order in a criminal bail application under Sections 380, 457, and 411 IPC. The court accepted submissions regarding jail overcrowding during the pandemic and granted bail to the applicants with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below.

Kripal and Another Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 6

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17483 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Kripal And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar,Rajesh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Vinay Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A for the State through video conferencing mode.

¶6

A first information report was lodged as Case Crime No.0192 of 2020 at Police Station- Khergarh District-Firozabad on 17.12.2020 under Section 457, 380 IPC.

¶7

The bail application of the applicants was rejected by learned Special Judge S.C/ S.T Act, Firozabad on 08.02.2021.

¶8

The applicants are in jail since 11.01.2021, pursuant to the said F.I.R.

¶9

Sri Vinay Kumar, learned counsel for applicants contends that the applicants have not been named in the FIR. There is no independent witness of the alleged recovery. The criminal history of the applicants have been explained. The applicants claim parity with the co-accused Satish @ Kalla who has been granted bail by this Court by order dated 01.06.2021 rendered in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 17409 of 2021. Lastly it is contended by Sri Rajeev Kumar Singh, learned counsel for applicants that the applicants shall not abscond and will fully cooperate in the criminal law proceedings. The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.

¶10

Learned A.G.A could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶11

Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jail during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020 , Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India ). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.

¶12

I see merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicants and accordingly hold that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶13

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicants Kripal and Balveer be released on bail in Case Crime No.192 of 2020 at Police Station- Khairgarh District-Firozabad under Sections 380, 457, 411 IPC on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

(i) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either through their counsel or personally as and when directed by the learned trial court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them in accordance with law.

¶16

(ii) The applicants 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 applicants 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.

¶17

(iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial, the trial in order to secure his presence may issue a proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. In case the applicants fail 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.

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

(vi) 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.

¶21

Order Date :- 10.6.2021 Nadeem Ahmad

Kripal and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kripal and Another 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vijay Verma Vs State of U.P.

Mangroo Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Rashid Vs State of U.P.

Rahman and Another Vs State of U.P.

Nawab Ali Vs State of U.P.

Sandeep Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P.