Allowed

Virendra Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC11 Oct 2022/3767/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous bail application, the Hon'ble High Court granted bail to the applicant Virendra Kumar in a case involving Sections 323, 504, and 326 I.P.C. The court was satisfied regarding the prima facie innocence as the victim's statement contradicted the FIR, though no view was expressed on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Virendra Kumar released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3767 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Virendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Shyam Sunder Chandra,Saroj Kumar Verma

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

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

¶7

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. 43 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 326 I.P.C., P.S. Sidhauli, District Sitapur.

¶8

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 certain misconception. He submits that wife of the applicant sustained injuries over her nose as she fell down. He has also drawn attention of this Court towards page 5 of the rejoinder affidavit dated 27.8.2022 wherein the statement of the wife of the applicant has been recorded by the trial court on 16.8.2022. He submits that from perusal of the aforesaid statement, it reveals that the applicant was not involved in committing the offence but the victim herself sustained injuries with knife when she fell down upon it. Thus, the victim herself has contradicted the version of the F.I.R. and has demolished the whole prosecution story. There is no previous criminal history of the applicant, which has been explained in para 10 of the bail application. The applicant is a law abiding citizen, who is languishing in jail since 5.2.2022. In case, the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and will co-operate in the trial proceedings.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail but he could not dispute the fact that the victim herself has demolished prosecution story in her statement recorded on 16.8.2022 before the trial court.

¶10

Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative

¶11

theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶12

Let the applicant Virendra Kumar involved in the 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:-

¶13

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

¶14

(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;

¶15

(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

¶16

(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.

¶17

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.

¶18

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.

¶19

Order Date :- 11.10.2022 Ram Murti

¶20

Digitally signed by RAM MURTI YADAV Date: 2022.10.12 19:51:34 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Virendra Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virendra Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Ajay Ghildyal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Seyc. Home Lko.

Ajay Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Jainendra Sharma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Rajneesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home.Lko

Kamla Maghar Vs Union of India Thru. Intelligence Officer Ncb Lucknow and Anr.

Romi @ Rama Shankar Vs State of U.P.