Allowed

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

Allahabad HC27 Jul 2021BAIL/24158/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application for two accused convicted under Sections 272 IPC and Section 60(2) of the Excise Act. The court, without examining merits, granted bail on personal bond and two sureties, accounting for court lockdown due to the pandemic.

What did the court decide?

Accused applicants released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to specified conditions.

Krishna Kumar @ Keshav and Other Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24158 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Krishna Kumar @ Keshav And another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicantsKrishna Kumar @ Keshav and Satya Narayan, who are involved in Case Crime No.79 of 2021 under Sections 272 I.P.C. and Section 60(2) of Excise Act, Police Station-Patiyali, District-Kasganj.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants are innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case; the police has shown recovery of 02 canes of 20 litres of liquor and 300 kg of Lahan (raw material used for preparing illegal wine). It is alleged that no independent witness was present at the time of preparation of alleged recovery memo and entire allegation of preparation of illegal wine is false and concocted. The applicants are in jail since 12.03.2021 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 applicants are 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 applicants are entitled for bail.

¶10

Let the above mentioned applicants involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on each of them 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 applicants 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

¶13

cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicants 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 applicants 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/-

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Kumar @ Keshav and Other 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

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

Guddu Kumar Mahto Vs State of U.P.