Allowed

Manish Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. U.P. Lucknow

Allahabad HC24 Jan 2022/547/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 547 of 2022, the High Court allowed bail to the accused applicant. The court noted the charge-sheet was already filed and there was uncertainty regarding who caused a specific injury, finding it a fit case for enlargement despite the serious charges.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed subject to personal bond and two sureties in like amount and furnishing of undertaking against tampering, intimidating witnesses, seeking adjournments, and appearing in court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 547 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Manish Kumar

¶4

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. U.P. Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Jaikaran

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶8

The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 336 of 2021 under Section 323, 506, 324, 352, 307 Indian Penal Code, Police Station Mohanganj, District Amethi.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the incident occurred in the night when there was no source of light. The applicant and co-accused Radhe Pasi have leveled allegation of assault on the injured. The injury report of the injured depicts that except injury no.1 the other three injuries were found simple in nature. So far as injury no.1 is concerned, no fracture has been found in the forehead and there is no material on record to suggest that injury is grievous and therefore injury no.1 is also simple in nature. It is not clear from the statement of prosecution witness including the injured witness as to who has caused the injury no.1. Charge-sheet has been filed in the case. The applicant is in jail since 23.11.2021.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the facts mentioned above.

¶11

I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties.

¶12

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, perusal of the record and also considering the facts that the applicant is in jail since 23.11.2021, charge-sheet has been filed in the matter, and it is

¶13

not clear from the prosecution case that as to who has caused injury no.1, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶14

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Manish Kumar be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned with the following conditions:

¶15

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶16

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

(iv) 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. 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.

¶19

(v) 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

(vi) 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

¶21

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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

Order Date :- 24.1.2022

¶23

Madhu

Manish Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. U.P. Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. U.P. Lucknow

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

Prem Vs State of U.P.

Aanand Tiwari Vs State of U.P.

Raju Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow

Lalit Tharu Vs State of U.P. Thru Its Secy Home Deptt Civil Secy U.P.

Rakesh Kumar Kushwaha Vs State of U.P.

Rajeshwar Oraon Vs U.O.I. Thru. Jr. Intelligence Officer Ncb Lucknow