Allowed

Kapil @ Tony v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Jul 2022BAIL/28510/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal bail application regarding an assault case, the High Court allowed the applicant's bail after considering the non-vital nature of the injury, lack of criminal history, and reliance on a Supreme Court precedent, citing Article 21 of the Constitution.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to standard bail conditions including no interference with witnesses and attendance at trial.

Kapil @ Tony Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28510 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Kapil @ Tony Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mukesh Joshi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jitendra Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Kapil @ Tony, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 102 of 2022, under Sections 307, 34 IPC and section 3/25 Arms Act Police Station Kundarki, DistrictMoradabad, during pendency of trial.

¶7

There is allegation against the applicant that on account of dispute regarding tractor applicant has caused firearm injury in the left ankle of the injured.Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case.The injury is on non vital part of the body of the injured.The applicant is in jail since 13.5.2022 and has no criminal history.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, argument advanced on behalf of the parties, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant 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. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶11

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶12

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶13

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶14

That the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any 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 or to any police ofÏcer;

¶15

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.

¶16

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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶17

The concerned Court/Authority/OfÏcial shall

¶18

verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the ofÏcial website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 12.7.2022 Atul kr. sri.

¶20

Digitally signed by ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.07.13 18:38:55 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kapil @ Tony v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kapil @ Tony 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahtab Vs State of U.P.

Vijay Chhavada Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Manoj Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Rajjab Ali @ Babbu Vs State of U.P.

Dhruvnarayan Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Sunil @ Sushil Vs State of U.P.