Allowed

Rajesh Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Nov 2022BAIL/52645/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, in a bail application, considered the nature of the allegations and circumstances while formulating conditions for release. The bench found no specific opinion necessary on the merits but determined the case fit for bail, subject to standard undertakings regarding court attendance and conduct.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties subject to conditions regarding court attendance and conduct.

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

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52645 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Rajendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶6

By means of this application, the applicant is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.775 of 2022, under Sections 323, 395, 307, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Banda.

¶7

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. The applicant has never committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. It is a cross case. In the alleged incident, applicant's side have also received injuries for which FIR from the side of the applicant's has also been lodged on the same day. Further submission is that the prosecution side have also not explained the injury of the applicant's side. As per injury report, all injuries are simple in nature. Only general allegation has been levelled against the applicant. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 01.09.2022 having no previous criminal history.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, but could not controvert the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the

¶10

punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, submission of learned counsel for the parties, considering the law laid down in the case of Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018 (3), SCC, 2 but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicant- Rajesh Kumar involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions :

¶12

(i) 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.

¶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 IPC.

¶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., 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 IPC.

¶15

(iv) 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.

¶16

(v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶18

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶19

Order Date :- 22.11.2022

¶20

Ajeet

¶21

Digitally signed by AJEET KUMAR PATEL Date: 2022.11.22 15:16:40 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rajesh Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Devendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Sajid Vs State of U.P. though Principal Secretary (Home) at Lucknow, U.P.

Kailash Chandra Pal Vs State of U.P.

Jai Prakash Singh Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Satendra Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others

Akhilesh Vs State of U.P.