Allowed

Kaushal v. State of U.P. through Secretary Home at Lucknow

Allahabad HC15 Jul 2022BAIL/10207/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the court examined the circumstances including allegations of false cases and animosity. The court held it to be a fit case for bail and allowed the application subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties and compliance with specified conditions.

Kaushal Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home at Lucknow — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10207 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Kaushal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Through Secretary Home At Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Saksham Srivastava,Akhilesh Srivastava,Narayan Singh(Kushwaha) Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Binod Kumar Tripathi

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Narayan Singh Kushwaha, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jitendra Kumar Jaiswal, the learned Additional Government Advocate, Sri Binod Kumar Tripathi, the learned counsel appearing for the informant and perused the record.

¶6

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 348 of 2021, under Sections 386, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Etah during pendency of the trial in the Court below.

¶7

The aforesaid first information was lodged on the basis of an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. filed by the informant alleging that the applicant has three accounts on facebook on which he uploads photographs of illegal weapons and posts threatening status and on the basis of the posts uploaded by the applicant on the facebook, the informant assumes that the applicant is threatening the informant's life life and property.

¶8

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the allegations leveled in the F.I.R. are false and the application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was filed on 05.02.2021 after an inordinate delay of almost eight months since posting of the alleged offending posts, without giving any explanation for the delay. It has been stated that the F.I.R. was lodged due to an old animosity. It is further stated that earlier the informant had lodged an F.I.R. against the applicant and three other co-accused persons on 09.05.2020, under Sections 394, 323, 504, 506, 342 IPC, Police Station - Pilua, District Etah, in which the applicant was released on bail upon submitting a personal bond before the police. On the very next day i.e. on 10.05.2020, the informant's sister - in - law (Bhabhi) had lodged an F.I.R. against the applicant's family members under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 307, 323, 504, 506, 427, 188, 269, 270 IPC and Section 3 of the Epidemic Diseases Ac,

¶9

1897, which was registered Case Crime No. 131 of 2020, Police Station- Pilua, District Etah, in which the applicant has been enlarged on bail by means of an order dated 10.02.2021 passed by the learned Trial Court.

¶10

Apart from the aforesaid cases, there is one more case registered against the applicant i.e. Case Crime No. 299 of 2018 under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station- Pilua, District Etah, in which the applicant and the informant had entered into a compromise and the applicant had been enlarged on bail in the aforesaid case. It is further stated that on 10.05.2020, the applicant's father had lodged an FIR against the informant and his family members, on the basis whereof, the Case Crime No. 132 of 2020 under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 336, 188, 269, 270 IPC and Section 3 of the Epidemic Diseases Ac, 1897 was registered.

¶11

The applicant is languishing in jail since 10.01.2022 and as his bail application was fixed for disposal on 10.02.2021, the informant moved an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. on 05.02.2021 in an attempt to continue the applicant's incacrceration. In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has categorically been stated that the applicant has never posted any threatening messages on facebook or whatsapp and the present prosecution is of the sole enmity of the informant and his family members.

¶12

It has been stated in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that there is no possibility of the applicant tampering with any evidence. In such circumstances, applicant is entitled for bail. It is also submitted that the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail and he will fully cooperate in the investigation.

¶13

Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate and the learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for grant of bail.

¶14

Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I find it to be a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant in the aforesaid case crime number.

¶15

In the light of preceding discussion and without making any observation on the merit of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶16

Let the applicant Kaushal be released on bail in Case Crime No. 348 of 2021, under Sections 386, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Etah on furnishing a personal

¶17

bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below, subject to the following conditions:-

¶18

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

¶19

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶20

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶21

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application before this Court seeking cancellation of the bail.

¶23

Order Date :- 15.7.2022 Ashish Pd.

¶24

Digitally signed by ASHISH PRASAD Date: 2022.07.20 13:44:25 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kaushal v. State of U.P. through Secretary Home at Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kaushal v. State of U.P. through Secretary Home at Lucknow

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

Bittu Bharti Vs State of U.P.

Tannu @ Tej Singh Vs State of U.P.

Baseem Vs State of U.P.

Rajan @ Rajendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ganga Singh @ Gango Vs State of U.P.

Vikas Yadav Vs State of U.P.