Allowed

Kapil v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC8 Sept 2021CRLA/665/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal, the single judge allowed the appellant plea seeking bail in a case involving alleged instigation to suicide. The court set aside the order rejecting the bail application, citing the lack of convincing arguments by the State and the delay in lodging the FIR.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order rejecting bail is set aside; the appellant is released on bail with personal bonds and two sureties subject to cooperation in trial.

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

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 665 of 2021

¶3

Appellant :- Kapil Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Anjali Singh,Ajay Sengar,Jaysingh Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶6

This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A (2) of S.C./S.T. Act as Amended, has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the order dated 05.01.2021, passed by the Additional District Judge/Special Judge, S.C. and S.T., Lalitpur in Case Crime No. 1612 of 2017, under Sections - 306, 506 I.P.C., Section - 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atroticities) Act, Police Station - Kotwali Lalitpur, District - Lalitpur.

¶7

Contention, in brief, is that in this case assuming it to be that the appellant was involved or his act led to the commission of suicide, even then, when everything was known to the informant, how and why and under what circumstances, the F.I.R. was lodged after an elapse of more than three months. That fact speaks volumes about the tutoring and deliberation made in this case, otherwise there is nothing clinching and consistent against the appellant to connect him with the alleged offence. In case the appellant is admitted to bail, there is no possibility of his absconding or misusing the liberty of bail. The appellant has no previous criminal history and is languishing in jail since 26.11.2020.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.

¶9

I have considered the rival submissions so made and having gone through the entire record including the order by which, bail application of the appellant has been rejected, impugned herein this appeal.

¶10

Nothing convincing has been argued on behalf of the complainant/State so as to justify and sustain the order passed by the court below rejecting the bail application of the appellant.

¶11

Thus, in view of the above and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the evidence, complicity of accused, I am of the view that the appellant has made out a case for bail.

¶12

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 05.01.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.

¶13

Let the accused-appellant - Kapil involved in the aforesaid case crime number for the aforesaid offences be released on bail on his furnishing personal bonds and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the condition that appellant shall cooperate in the trial and will not jump the bail.

¶14

Order Date :- 8.9.2021 S Rawat

Kapil v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kapil v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Vinta @ Vintu Vs State of U.P.and Another

Amar Nath Maurya Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajendra yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Vishal Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another

Brijesh Pandey Vs State of Up

Kalua Vs State of U.P.