Allowed

Umesh Kumar @ Umesh Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC16 Nov 2022/9656/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 326 IPC. The court granted bail without expressing a view on the merits, noting co-accused were already on bail, and fixed standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions not to tamper with evidence and to appear in court.

Umesh Kumar @ Umesh Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 27

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9656 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Umesh Kumar @ Umesh Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Srivastava,Arvind Kumar Verma

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Aniruddh Kumar Singh-I, 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.0581 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 326, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Kheri.

¶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. There are general allegations against all the accused persons excluding Amit and Jagdish Prasad. Identically situated co-accused Pradeep Kimar @ Munish, Rishikant, Sudhir Kumar and Dinesh Chandra Verma have already been enlarged on bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.11791 of 2022, 11198 of 2022 and 11800 of 2022, vide orders dated 17.10.2022, 28.9.2022 and 17.10.2022. The applicant is seeking parity of the orders aforesaid. There is no criminal history of the applicant, which has been explained in para 22 of the bail application. The applicant is a law abiding citizen, who is languishing in jail since 22.6.2022. 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 could not dispute the fact that co-accused Pradeep Kimar @ Munish, Rishikant, Sudhir Kumar and Dinesh Chandra Verma have already been enlarged by this 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 theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing

¶11

any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶12

Let the applicant Umesh Kumar @ Umesh Verma 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 :- 16.11.2022 Ram Murti

¶20

Digitally signed by RAM MURTI YADAV Date: 2022.11.16 17:38:33 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Umesh Kumar @ Umesh Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umesh Kumar @ Umesh Verma 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saurabh Yadav @ Nirmal Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Vinodanand Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Princ Secy. Cikvil Sectt. Home Lko.

Pradeep Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru the Secy. Home Lko.

Vandana Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Surendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Majeed Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others