Allowed

Vikas Kumar Verma Thru. His Father Rajesh Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Homes Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC11 Jul 2023/603/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed this criminal revision to set aside the confirmed lower orders denying bail. Holding that there were major contradictions in the prosecution story and the co-accused was already on bail, the Court directed the release of the appellant on personal bonds with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Revision allowed; lower orders set-aside. Appellant released on bail by furnishing personal bonds with two sureties each.

Vikas Kumar Verma Thru. His Father Rajesh Kumar Vs State… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:44851

¶2

Court No. - 29

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 603 of 2023 Revisionist :- Vikas Kumar Verma Thru. His Father Rajesh Kumar

¶4

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Homes Lko. And Another

¶5

Counsel for Revisionist :- Arun Kumar Verma,Dinesh Kumar Verma

¶6

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Subodh Kumar Pandey

¶7

Hon'ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal,J.

¶8

1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. None appear on behalf of opposite party no.2 to press this revisionist.

¶9

This criminal revision under section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children Act, 2015 has been filed against the order dated 12.05.2023, passed by the Special Judge, Children Court, Lakhimpur Kheri, in Criminal Appeal No.18 of 2023(Vikas Kumar Verma Vs. State of U.P.) as well as judgment and order dated 11.04.2023 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Lakhimpur Kheri, in Case Crime No.91 of 2023, under section 376, Police Station Kheri, District Lakhimpur Kheri, by which the bail application of the revisionist has been rejected.

¶10

As per office report dated 03.07.2023 notice has been served personally upon opposite party no.2 and vakalatnama of Sri Subodh Kumar Pandey, Advocate has been filed on behalf of the opposite party no.2, however, none appear on his behalf to press this revisionist today.

¶11

It is submitted that by learned counsel for the revisionist that alleged incident was taken place on 28.02.2023 and FIR was lodged against the revisionist and co-accused Karan @ Umesh on 04.03.2023 after much thought on the basis of manufactured story. It is further submitted that co-accused Karan @ Umesh has already enlarged on bail vide order dated 09.06.2023,

¶12

passed by Sessions Judge, Lakhimpur Kheri, hence the revisionist is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity of the order aforesaid. There are major contradictions in the prosecution story as well as statements of the complainant/victim recorded under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. It is also submitted that revisionist has falsely implicated in the instant case due to village party bandi and rivalry of election of Village Pradhan.

¶13

On the other hand, learned AGA for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submits that there is no illegality in the order passed by both the court below. He further submits that the bail application of the revisionist has been rightly rejected, therefore, there is no ground to set-aside the aforesaid orders passed by the court below and the revisionist is also not entitled for bail.

¶14

Considering the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the parties and perusal of record shows that the Juvenile Justice Board, Lakhimpur Kheri rejected the bail application of the revisionist on the ground of presumption that the moral, physical and psychological status will be in danger on release of the revisionist on bail. The appellate court i.e. Special Judge, Children Court, Lakhimpur Kheri, while rejecting the bail application of the revisionist has placed reliance upon section 12(1) of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and reached to the conclusion that offence is serious in nature and on release of the revisionist on bail, there will be negative impact with local persons.

¶15

It also transpires from perusal of record revisionist is student and there are long educational career of the revisionist. In both the aforesaid order of the court below it is not mentioned that as to how there will be negative impact with local persons, if the revisionist is under full guidance and discipline of his father and

¶16

father of the revisionist has always protected his son from the association of criminals in further, if revisionist is released on bail. There are major contradictions in the prosecution story as well as statements of the complainant/victim recorded under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. Co-accused Karan @ Umesh has already enlarged on bail vide order dated 09.06.2023, passed by Sessions Judge, Lakhimpur Kheri.

¶17

In the aforesaid circumstances, I am of the opinion that revisionist is liable to be allowed and the revisionist is entitled to be released on bail.

¶18

Accordingly, the revision is allowed and the orders dated 12.05.2023, passed by the Special Judge, Children Court, Lakhimpur Kheri, in Criminal Appeal No.18 of 2023(Vikas Kumar Verma Vs. State of U.P.) as well as judgment and order dated 11.04.2023 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Lakhimpur Kheri, in Case Crime No.91 of 2023, under section 376, Police Station Kheri, District Lakhimpur Kheri, are hereby set-aside. 10. Let the revisionist- Vikas Kumar Verma convicted and sentenced in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing personal bonds with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶19

(Renu Agarwal,J.)

¶20

Order Date :- 11.7.2023 VKG

¶21

Digitally signed by :- VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Vikas Kumar Verma Thru. His Father Rajesh Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Homes Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas Kumar Verma Thru. His Father Rajesh Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Homes Lko. and Another

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

Umesh Chandra Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Dinesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Nanhe and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Irshad Ahamad Khan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Lko. and 2 Others

Lal Mohammad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko and 9 Others

Sumaila Khatun Vs State of U.P. and Anr.