Allowed

Jitendra Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 May 2023BAIL/17172/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed bail to the applicant, who was accused of snatching a gold chain. The court observed that it is a fit case for bail without expressing an opinion on the merits of the false implication charge.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed. Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding witness tampering, trial cooperation, and criminal activity.

Jitendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:97615

¶2

Court No. - 88

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17172 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Jitendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satish Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J.

¶6

Supplementary afÏdavit filed today, is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 0198 of 2022, under Sections 392, 411 IPC, Police Station Phaphamau, District Prayagraj during pendency of the trial.

¶9

It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in snatching of gold chain of the informant's wife. It has further been contended that he has been implicated on the basis of false recovery memo. It has further been contended that the applicant was serving the first informant and when he demanded his labour charge he has been deliberately implicated in the false case. There is no other criminal history against the accused-applicant except a case registered under the Gambling Act. The applicant is languishing in jail since 03.07.2022. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and co-operate in trial.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but he could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶11

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the

¶12

case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶13

In the light of the aforenoted discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed .

¶14

Let the applicant-Jitendra Kumar involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶15

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶16

(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶18

(iv) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

(v) Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶21

Order Date : - 8.5.2023 Puspendra

¶22

Digitally signed by :- PUSPENDRA NARAYAN SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jitendra Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra 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

Shele @ Shilesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Krishna Dutt and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Lakhchandra @ Halke Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bhupendra Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Ravi Vs State of U.P.

Ganesh Soni Vs State of U.P.