Allowed

Anil Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Apr 2023BAIL/1166/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail to the applicant Anil Kumar in a case under Sections 364-A, 302, 201 IPC. The court observed the applicant had made a prima facie case based on the role assigned and a co-accused's prior bail release, granting bail subject to bond and standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to undertakings regarding witness tampering and court attendance.

Anil Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 53

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1166 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Anil Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kripa Shankar Tiwari,Shivani Chaudhary Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bhawesh Pratap Singh,Mohd. Ayub

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Kripa Shankar Tiwari alongwith Ms. Shivani Chaudhary, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State, Sri Bhawesh Pratap Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and perused the record.

¶6

The instant application for bail has been moved on behalf of the applicant, Anil Kumar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.307 of 2022, under Sections 364-A, 120-B/34, 302, 201 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Khaga, District Fatehpur, during pendency of the trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the first information report is based on false and fabricated facts. The accused/ applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has also submitted that the applicant is not named in the FIR nor there are any other incriminating materials to implicate and connect him with the alleged occurrence. He has produced bail order passed on Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.57205 of 2022 (Abhishek Gupta Vs. State o UP) which has been allowed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 21.12.2022. From perusal of record it transpires that the applicant is neither named in the FIR nor has committed murder of the deceased though the role assigned to him is regarding demand of ransom from his mobile. Since bail application of co-accused Abhishek Gupta who according to the recovery memo and the statement of the coaccused persons, committed the crime has been enlarged on bail, therefore present applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant also contened that even the applicant was not present with the accused persons who alleged to have committed the offence and he was not present in the car at the time of commission of the alleged crime. Learned counsel for the applicant has also submitted that the accused/applicant is

¶8

languishing in jail since 31.07.2022, who has no previous criminal history. His further submission is that in case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and he will also fully cooperate with the trial court in getting the trial concluded expeditiously. He has also submitted that the applicant will not intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail.

¶10

Having heard learned counsel for applicant, learned AGA for State and upon consideration of evidence on record, accusations made as well as complicity of applicant but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail.

¶11

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶12

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

¶13

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial;

¶14

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment;

¶15

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail;

¶16

The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶17

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence, in case the witnesses are present in court;

¶18

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, default of this condition is

¶19

deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

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

¶21

It is made clear that the trial of the aforesaid case shall be conducted without being influenced by any observation made herein above which are confined to the disposal of the instant application for bail.

¶22

Order Date :- 7.4.2023 Shahroz

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SHAHROJ ALAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anil Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramwati Vs State of U.P.

Bobby @ Pankaj Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dharmendra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Jogendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ishlam Khan and Others Vs State of U.P.

Karmulla Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others