Allowed

Chunnu Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Dept. of Home

Allahabad HC23 Sept 2022/3377/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted bail to the applicant Chunnu Kumar under the circumstances where an identically situated co-accused had already been released on bail by a coordinate bench of this Court. The applicant was released on personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail with a personal bond and two sureties on specific conditions.

Chunnu Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Dept. of Home — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3377 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Chunnu Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Dept. Of Home Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 913 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 411, 120B IPC & Section 66-D of the I.T. Act, P.S.- Kotwali Nagar, District - Barabanki.

¶7

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive and he was not named in the FIR. He next contends that identically situated co-accused namely Rajan Kushwaha has already been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2159 of 2022 vide order dated 05.03.2022; thus applicant is also seeking parity of the order aforesaid. He next submits that applicant was not involved in committing the aforesaid offence. The applicant is in jail since 02.12.2021. In case he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of bail but he could not dispute the fact that identically situated co-accused has been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court and further there is no other criminal history against the applicant.

¶9

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, I find that identically situated co-accused has already been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court, further there is no other criminal history against the applicant, coupled with the fact that he is languishing in jail since 02.12.2021, thus without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶10

Let the applicant- Chunnu Kumar involved in the

¶11

aforementioned 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:-

¶12

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶13

(2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. He 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 of the Indian Penal Code;

¶14

(3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and

¶15

(4) 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. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶17

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶18

Order Date :- 23.9.2022 Ujjawal

¶19

Digitally signed by UJJAWAL PARJAPATI Date: 2022.09.28 10:30:40 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Chunnu Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Dept. of Home

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chunnu Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Dept. of Home

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

Jagannath @ Lavkush Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mohd. Azam Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Sarvesh Kumar Agrahari Vs State of U.P.

Dharnidhar Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Afroz Khan Alias Chunnu Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Prakash Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.