The court released Kamlesh Kumar Yadav on bail during trial for offences under IPC and Prevention of Corruption Act. It noted an unexplained three-day delay in lodging the FIR and that co-accused have already been granted bail, finding no likelihood of evidence tampering.
Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount.
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. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28761 of 2022
Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jahar Singh (Kashyap),Alok Ranjan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Jahar Singh (Kashyap), learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant- Kamlesh Kumar Yadav, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 79 of 2021, u/s 323, 342, 504, 506 IPC and 7/13 Prevention of Corruption Act, P.S. Mail, District Deoria.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that first informant has a detailed history who is involved in various types of impersonation and has been caught many times. He has also defrauded money of people. The allegation against him in the FIR are totally false and concocted. The applicant is a police constable. The FIR has been lodged after 3 days of the incident of which there is no plausible explanation regarding delay in lodging of the same. Co-accused Amit Pandey has been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 31.8.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.19462 of 2022, copy of the same is annexed as Annexure No.1 to the supplementary affidavit. Even co-accused Udai Pratap Rai was granted anticipatory bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 6.10.2021 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.15433 of 2021, copy of the same is annexed on page 55 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application. It is further argued that charge sheet in the matter has been submitted and as such there are no chances of the applicant tempering with the evidence or not cooperating with investigation. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 27 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 25.5.2022.
Per contra learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.
After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the
record, it is evident that FIR has been lodged after an unexplained delay of three days. Co-accused has been granted bail and anticipatory bail by coordinate Benches of this Court.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Let the applicant-Kamlesh Kumar Yadav, 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 concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.
(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A IPC.
(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the
applicant.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
The bail application is allowed.
(Samit Gopal, J.)
Order Date :- 22.9.2022 Gaurav
Digitally signed by GAURAV KULSHRESTHA Date: 2022.09.24 15:04:22 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant should be released on bail given the unexplained delay in lodging the FIR and co-accused already secured bail.
Whether there is a possibility of the applicant tampering with evidence or harming the complainant.
Whether conviction is likely given the nature of allegations against the applicant as a police constable.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Kamlesh Kumar Yadav
Samit Gopal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
