Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.…
Released on bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, attendance, no tampering with witnesses, and no illegal activities.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 90
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12105 of 2022
Applicant :- Vipin Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Srivastava,Mool Chandra Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sadhna Rani (Thakur),J.
Heard learned Counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
The accused applicant, Vipin Kumar is involved in Case Crime No. 50 of 2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B I.P.C., registered at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Etah.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the coaccused Rakendra Singh Yadav has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 06.04.2022 and the case of both the accused is identical. The present accused is languishing in jail since 16.01.2022, hence, the prayer for bail is made.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application but he could not contradict the facts mentioned above. It is argued that there is criminal history of one case to the credit of the present applicant.
According to the learned counsel for the applicant, in the case shown as criminal history the bail application is pending before the court concerned.
The role of the present accused is identical to the role of coaccused Rakendra Singh Yadav, who has been granted bail earlier by this court and case of present accused is based on the same footing as that of the co-accused.
Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, considering the seriousness of the charge and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of
bail.
Let the applicant - Vipin Kumar, who is involved in aforesaid 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 subject to following conditions:-
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, 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 ultimate merits of the case.
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
Order Date :- 12.4.2022 gp
Digitally signed by GANESH PRAKASH Date: 2022.04.13 18:46:21 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the applicant under the serious charges of cheating, forgery and criminal conspiracy.
Whether the reformative theory of punishment and Article 21 support granting bail despite prima facie evidence.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶11
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vipin Kumar
Sadhna Rani (Thakur)
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
