Allowed

Virendra Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Dec 2022BAIL/29974/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed the bail application of Virendra Kumar implicated in Section 304 IPC case. Arguments on false implication and injury severity were considered, and the court held the applicant met bail requirements subject to standard conditions including appearance and undertaking against adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions for appearance and no adjournment in witness presence.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29974 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Virendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ambreesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Ambreesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Rakesh Soni, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Virendra Kumar with a prayer to release him on bail in Sessions Trial No. 109 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 05 of 2022, under Section 304 I.P.C., Police Station- Sahail, District-Auraiya, during pendency of trial.

¶7

As per the prosecution version, the F.I.R. has been lodged by one of the sons of the deceased against his brother with the allegation that on 10.1.2022 at about 7:00 P.M. a petty dispute regarding dinner took place between the applicant and the deceased, due to which the applicant pushed the deceased wherein he sustained injury on his head. It is further alleged that first aid was given by the informant to the deceased, however, he died late in the night.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant is suffering from some ailment and is under treatment since 2018 as is evident from the document annexed as Annexure-6 to the application. The applicant is in a habit of getting angry on petty issues and due to the aforesaid behaviour there was a normal fight with his father regarding dinner. However, being the youngest and suffering from such ailment, the applicant was loved by his father. The informant being one of the brothers has provided first aid to the deceased and has not taken him into the hospital which means that no serious injury was caused by the applicant at the time when the dispute between the two took place and it is the informant who was there with the deceased, therefore, the applicant has not caused any such injuries with intention to cause death to the deceased. The informant has lodged the F.I.R. to falsely implicate the applicant in order to grab the share of applicant from the property of the deceased.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has also laid emphasis upon

¶10

the statement of the informant wherein he has stated that he had provided first aid to the deceased which also goes to show that no such serious injury was caused at the time when the petty dispute between the father and son took place at the time of dinner. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 12.1.2022. In case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.

¶11

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant- Virendra Kumar , involved in 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:-

¶14

(i) 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.

¶15

(ii) 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.

¶16

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

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the

¶18

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.

¶19

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶20

Order Date :- 21.12.2022 Vandana

¶21

Digitally signed by :- VANDANA GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Virendra Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virendra Kumar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sachin Vs State of U.P.

Sagar Vs State of U.P.

Raju @ Ajay Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Soni Chaurasiya Vs State of U.P.

Atul Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Deepak Shahi Vs State of U.P.