Allowed

Shivkumar Yadav @ Kampelu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Jun 2023BAIL/21268/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed bail to the applicant, who was in jail since March 23, 2023, following a false implication through a co-accused's confessional statement, despite opposing counsel not disputing the facts.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to conditions against tampering, unlawful activity, and misuse of liberty.

Shivkumar Yadav @ Kampelu Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:126615

¶2

Court No. - 65

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21268 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Shivkumar Yadav @ Kampelu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Belal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.

¶6

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

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant was not named in the FIR. The FIR was lodged against four named and 8-10 unknown accused persons with general allegation. The name of the applicant was surfaced in confessional statement of co-accused Ishtiyaque Ahmad, who has already been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 25.2.2022, passed in Criminal Misc.Bail Application No. 6659 of 2022. Copy of bail order has been appended as Annexure-4 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. There is no possibility of applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is in jail since 23.3.2023 and if released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.

¶9

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let applicant- Shivkumar Yadav @ Kampelu be released on bail in Case Crime No.433 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 332, 353, 307 IPC & 7 CLA Act, Police Station Sarai Inayat, District Allahabad on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, subject

¶11

to the following conditions:

¶12

(i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.

¶13

(ii) The applicant will abide by the orders of the court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶14

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activity.

¶15

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.

¶16

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶17

Order Date :- 14.6.2023

¶18

m.a.

¶19

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AYYUB High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shivkumar Yadav @ Kampelu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivkumar Yadav @ Kampelu 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Guman and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohan Vs State of U.P.

Amardeep Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Narendra Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Praveen Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Tej Bahadur Nishad and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another