Allowed

Rinku Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Aug 2022BAIL/10318/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court granted bail to second applicant Rinku Kumar accused under IPC 409 for misappropriation of public money. Bail was granted without expressing opinion on merits, subject to personal bond and two sureties, and strict conditions regarding presence, trial cooperation, and non-tampering.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions ensuring trial attendance and non-interference with evidence.

Rinku Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10318 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Rinku Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Devesh Kumar Shukla,Dharmesh Kumar Shukla

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

This is second bail application moved on behalf of the applicant.

¶7

The first bail application of the applicant was rejected on 26.11.2019 by a coordinate Bench of this Court which is not available now. More than two years have passed and this case has been listed before this Court as per order of Hon'ble the Chief Justice dated 27.04.2022.

¶8

This second bail application has been moved on the ground that the applicant is languishing in jail since 26.12.2018. The trial against the applicant has not been concluded as yet. The departmental enquiry against him regarding misappropriation of public money is also pending. He was a government employee. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant, Rinku Kumar, involved in Case Crime No. 269 of 2018 u/s 409 I.P.C., P.S.- Gonda, District- Aligarh, 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 that :-

¶10

(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial. In case the applicant does not co-operates with the trial, it shall be open for the informant to file application for cancellation of bail of the applicant.

¶11

(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶12

(iii) 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.

¶13

(iv) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. 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

(v) 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

¶15

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.

¶16

(vi) 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. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶17

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶18

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶19

Order Date :- 6.8.2022 KS

¶20

Digitally signed by KISHAN SINHA Date: 2022.08.10 10:03:59 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rinku Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rinku Kumar v. State of U.P.

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

Akeel @ Sannu Vs State of U.P.

Pankaj Bahal Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home at Lucknow

Dhanman Bind Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suresh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Gucchan Vs State of U.P.

Jhuman Shah Vs State of U.P.