Allowed

Praveen Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Oct 2022BAIL/35303/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad, J. dismissed no objection to bail for the applicant Praveen Kumar in a case involving offences under Sections 401, 411, and 413 IPC. The court granted bail subject to conditions regarding presence in court and adherence to trial dates, as co-accused had already been released.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties, subject to conditions regarding court attendance and undertaking against abuse of liberty.

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

¶1

Court No. - 58

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35303 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Praveen Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nirbhay Singh,Jitendra Kumar,Rajeev Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Praveen Kumar with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 115 of 2022, under Sections 401, 411, 413 I.P.C., Police Station- Sidhpura, District- Kasganj, during the pendency of the trial.

¶8

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case for the purpose of harassment. It is further contended that coaccused, namely, Mahesh, Sunil and Irshad have already been enlarged on bail by the Coordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 18.08.2022, 10.08.2022 and 11.08.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 34542 of 2022, 32581 of 2022 and 33851 of 2022. The case of the present applicant is similar and identical to that of the aforesaid co-accused. As such, the applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail. It is further submitted that the applicant has criminal history of one case, which has been explained in para- 3 of the supplementary affidavit. It is next contended that 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. The applicant is in jail since 11.07.2022.

¶9

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but he could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

Considering the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of cases and release of the accused, material/evidence brought on

¶11

record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment as well as the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, let the applicant 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:-

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(iv) 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

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 19.10.2022 SK Srivastava

¶18

Digitally signed by SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.10.19 17:16:58 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Praveen Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praveen 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

Amit Lalwani Vs State of U.P.

Shyam Swaroop Alias Sonu and Another Vs State of U.P.

Chhotey Vs State of U.P.

Naushad Vs State of U.P.

Bhagwandas @ Munna Vs State of U.P.

Sahibul Islam and Another Vs State of U.P.