Allowed

Vikas v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Jun 2023BAIL/20654/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge bail applicant sought relief under Section 439 CrPC. He argued false implication and simple injuries. The court found a fit case for bail, discharged him on personal bond and two sureties, strictly imposing conditions regarding court proceedings and trial attendance.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions prohibiting delay in trial and ensuring presence.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:124490

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20654 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Vikas Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Khalid Mahmood Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sunil Kumar Srivastava

¶5

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 65 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148,149, 323, 307, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kishani, District Mainpuri.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that prosecution story is false and fabricated. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. False allegation has been made against the applicant. The injuries of the injured are simple in nature. The applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. There is no criminal history of the applicant. He has further submitted that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 2.3.2023.

¶9

On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. oppose the application for bail.

¶10

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicant Vikas, who is involved in aforementioned case 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶12

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall

¶13

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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

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

¶19

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.

¶20

Order Date :- 6.6.2023/A.

¶21

Digitally signed by :- AFAQ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vikas v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas 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

Ujjwal Tiwari Vs State of U.P.

Bhupesh Chandra Kushwaha Vs State of U.P.

Samir Vs State of U.P.

Aakash Vs State of U.P.

Sarurabh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.

Om Jaiswal@ Rajan Ahaluwaliya Vs State of U.P.