Allowed

Pramod Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC25 Aug 2021CRLA/763/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble Court allowed the criminal appeal against an order rejecting bail. The appellant was granted bail in a case under Sections 302, 307, 34 IPC and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Bail was granted with strict conditions and the impugned order was set aside.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted with conditions; Impugned order dated 02.01.2020 set aside.

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

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 763 of 2020

¶3

Appellant :- Pramod Kumar Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Akhil Ranjan,Karunesh Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Vishnu Swaroop Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This criminal appeal under Section 14 A (2) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short "S.C./S.T. Act") has been filed for setting-aside the impugned order dated 02.01.2020 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gorakhpur in Bail Application No.4123 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime no.573 of 2019, under Sections 302, 307, 34 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Sahjanwa, District-Gorakhpur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn the attention of the Court to the FIR lodged by Girjesh on 22.11.2019 under section 302, 307 and 34 IPC. The role attributed in the FIR is that the appellant was standing over the site. The next contention is that co-accused Shashi Kapoor Sahni(Criminal Appeal No.1139 of 2020) on 08.07.2020 and Ajay Nishad(Criminal Appeal No.2212 of 2020) on 17.02.2021 have been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court, copy of which has been produced for perusal. In this continuation, parity has also been claimed by saying that the case of the appellant stands on better footing qua the abovesaid co-accused persons, hence, the appellant is also liable to be released on bail. The appellant is languishing in jail since 25.11.2019.

¶8

Learned A.G.A as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has refuted the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant but do not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶9

The submission made by learned counsel for the appellant, prima facie, is quite appealing and convincing for the purpose of bail only.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, taking into account the manner and mode in which the appellant has been summoned and the period of detention already undergone, and also without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the appellant has made out a case for bail.

¶11

Let the appellant- Pramod Kumar , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶12

(i) THE APPELLANT WOULD FULLY COOPERATE IN THE CONCLUSION OF TRIAL WITHIN ONE YEAR AND ANY TEMPERING OR WILLING TACTICS ON THE PART OF THE APPELLANT TO DELAY THE TRIAL WOULD WARRANT THE AUTOMATIC CANCELLATION OF BAIL.

¶13

(ii) THE APPELLANT 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

(iii) THE APPELLANT 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

(iv) IN CASE, THE APPELLANT MISUSE 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 APPELLANT 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

(v) THE APPELLANT 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 APPELLANT 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

However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the appellant, shall have serious repercussion on his bail so granted by this court.

¶18

Accordingly, the appeal succeeds and the same stands allowed. Impugned order dated 02.01.2020 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gorakhpur in Bail Application No.4123 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime no.573 of 2019, under Sections 302, 307, 34 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Sahjanwa, District-Gorakhpur, is hereby set aside.

¶19

Order Date :- 25.8.2021 Sumit S

Pramod Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod Kumar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satto Vs State of U.P.

Ashok Kumar Chaudhary Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vishwanath Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sachin Arora Vs State of U.P.

Fakruddin and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bhagwan Das Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others