Allowed

Pushpendra Kumar @ Pushpendra Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Jan 2021BAIL/42548/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application of the applicant, noting the bail of co-accused persons and lack of criminal antecedents, citing parity and Article 21 without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to specified conditions including attendance at trial and filing of the order copy.

Pushpendra Kumar @ Pushpendra Singh Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42548 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Pushpendra Kumar @ Pushpendra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vipin Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arvind Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Case called out in the revised call. None has appeared on behalf of the complainant.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and also perused the record.

¶7

By means of the present bail application the applicant is seeking his bail in connection with Case Crime No.161 of 2020, u/s 147, 148, 323, 452, 325, 504, 506, 304 I.P.C., P.S.-Jalesar, District-Etah.

¶8

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that coaccused Kishan @ Jaynarayan and Ramkumar have been admitted on bail by this Court today itself while allowing Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.38877 of 2020. Contention of the counsel is that the case of the applicant is similar qua the aforesaid co-accused persons, therefore, adopting same reasoning as mentioned in bail order of aforesaid co-accused persons, the applicant may also be released on bail giving the benefit of principles of parity. The applicant is in jail since 20.2.2020 having no criminal antecedents.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that the case of applicant stands on similar footing than that of aforesaid co-accused persons who have been enlarged on bail by this Court.

¶10

Keeping in view that the case of applicant is similar qua the coaccused persons, who have been admitted on bail, therefore, adopting the same reasoning as mentioned in the bail order of co-accused persons and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that the applicant has made out

¶11

a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant Pushpendra Kumar @ Pushpendra Singh, who is involved in aforementioned Case 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶13

(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE 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

(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 IPC.

¶15

(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., 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, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

¶16

(iv) 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 IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶17

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL

¶18

WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶20

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶21

Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:

¶22

1. 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.

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

4. 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.

¶26

However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this Court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.

¶27

Order Date :- 12.1.2021 M. Kumar

Pushpendra Kumar @ Pushpendra Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pushpendra Kumar @ Pushpendra Singh 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

Smt Sarvati Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Somvati Devi Vs State of U.P.

Dilip @ Munne Vs State of U.P.

Sulley Vs State of U.P.

Kishan @Jaynarayan and Another Vs State of U.P.

Rampreet Sahni Vs State of U.P.