Allowed

Guddu Kumar Mahto v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Jul 2021BAIL/24150/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad granted bail to the accused-applicant Guddu Kumar Mahto involved in Case Crime No. 355 of 2020 under Sections 411 and 414 IPC. Relief was granted subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, with specific conditions allowing release without sureties during the Covid-19 pandemic lockdown.

What did the court decide?

Accused-applicant to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to specified conditions, or without sureties if courts are under lockdown due to Covid-19.

Guddu Kumar Mahto Vs State of U.P. — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24150 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Guddu Kumar Mahto Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and gone through the record.

¶6

This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicantGuddu Kumar Mahto, who is involved in Case Crime No.355 of 2020 under Sections 411 and 414 I.P.C., Police Station-Kotwali, District-Kanpur Nagar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case; the applicant is nominated in the F.I.R.on the basis of recovery of an many as 55 mobile phones from the bag of the applicant possession but there is no independent witness of alleged recovery. The applicant is in jail since 28.12.2020 and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial and thus, the applicant is entitled for indulgence.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without touching the merits of the case, the accused applicant is entitled for bail.

¶10

Let the above mentioned applicant involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶11

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence, shall cooperate in the investigation or trial and will not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶12

In case of breach of any of the conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant

¶13

and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶14

However, if due to Covid-19 pandemic, the Sub-ordinate Court is under lockdown, the applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.

¶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.

¶17

It is made clear that in the event the Sub-ordinate Court is functional as usual then the normal procedure/ mode of filing bail bonds and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned will be adopted.

¶18

Order Date :- 27.7.2021 MN/-

Guddu Kumar Mahto v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guddu Kumar Mahto 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

M/S Rudra Buildwell Projects Private Limited Vs State of U.P. and Another

Saurabh Bhardwaj Vs State of U.P. and Another

Fazar Mohammad Vs State of U.P.

Om Prakash Gupta and Others Vs State of U.P.

Veera @ Raghuveer Vs State of U.P. and and Another

Krishna Kumar @ Keshav and Other Vs State of U.P.