Allowed

Rajesh Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Jul 2022BAIL/15180/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court enlarged the applicant on bail in a criminal case involving Sections 376 and 504 IPC. Based on counsel's submission regarding false implication arising from a relationship gone awry and lack of prior criminal record, the court allowed bail without observing on the merits, imposing standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to standard conditions regarding trial attendance and non-influence of witnesses.

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

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15180 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Madan Mohan Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.0019 of 2022 at Police Station Jahanaganj District Azamgarh under Sections 376, 504, 506 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 19.01.2022.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Sessions Judge, Azamgarh on 18.02.2022.

¶7

Shri Madan Mohan Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The FIR arises out of relationship gone awry. The applicant and the victim were intimate. Though their relationship was consensual, the applicant never gave a plighted word to marry the victim. The FIR is being leveraged to force the applicant to marry the victim. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

¶8

Shri Rishi Chaddha, learned A.G.A for the State could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Learned AGA does not dispute the fact

¶9

that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

¶10

I see merit in the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and accordingly hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶11

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant-Rajesh Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶13

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

¶14

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the

¶18

prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶19

Order Date :- 5.7.2022 Nadeem

¶20

Digitally signed by NADEEM AHMAD Date: 2022.07.06 10:59:58 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rajesh Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Seema Vs State of U.P.

Arvind Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Surendra Vs State of U.P. Thr Pri. Sec. Home Govt. of U.P.

Shantiswaroop Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pradeep Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Virendra Kumar Patel Vs State of U.P.