Allowed

Kaule Alias Aniket v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC13 Jul 2022BAIL/16250/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application filed by Kaule Alias Aniket challenging arrest in a case involving sending objectionable photographs. The single judge granted bail observing lack of corroborative evidence against the applicant and absence of probable complicity.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions including undertaking not to tamper with evidence and attend court proceedings.

Kaule Alias Aniket Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16250 of 2022

¶3

Applicant : Kaule Alias Aniket Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Pritam Lal Patel,Shailendra Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.215 of 2018, under Sections 354-Gha I.P.C. & 11/12 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Aurai, District Bhadohi.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per FIR version allegation against the applicant is that applicant sent objectionable photograph of informant's daughter along with Sheru on mobile of his grand-son Dipak Kumar. He further submits that mobile on which the said photograph was sent has not been recovered from the possession of the applicant. He next submits that five persons are named in the FIR, except the applicant and Parvesh other co-accused have been exonerated after investigation. He further submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 23.3.2022.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that as per case diary, statement of the informant and other witnesses photo was sent by the applicant and other co-accused, therefore, he does not deserve any benevolence.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, as per investigation except the statement of witness no corroborative evidence collected, complicity of the applicant from the evidence, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the

¶10

case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let applicant Kaule Alias Aniket involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶11

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

¶12

(ii) 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

(iii) The applicant 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.

¶14

(iv) 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, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(v) 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.

¶16

Order Date :- 13.7.2022

¶17

m.a.

¶18

Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD AYYUB Date: 2022.07.15 10:21:48 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kaule Alias Aniket v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kaule Alias Aniket v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Taslim Vs State of U.P.

Dharmendra Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Praveen Pratap Singh @ Kanha Vs State of U.P.

Ram Narayan Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Satendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Kallu Vs State of U.P.