Allowed

Sushil Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC29 May 2023BAIL/22848/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to Sushil Kumar in a robbery case involving IPC offences 395, 397, and 412. The court imposed specific conditions regarding court attendance and prohibition of adjournments. This decision does not affect the trial court's independent assessment of the case.

What did the court decide?

Release on personal bond and two sureties with undertaking against adjournments and strict attendance at trial dates.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:119192

¶2

Court No. - 83

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22848 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Yogendra Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Abhishek Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 336 of 2022 U/S 395, 397, 412 IPC, Police Station Ganga Nagar, District Meerut, during the pendency of trial.

¶9

As per prosecution story, some 7-8 unknown persons with muffled face are stated to have robbed the informant on 15.11.2022, at about 5.30 and taken away golden and silver ornaments worth 9.2 lakhs.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. He has further stated that the applicant has been implicated in seven cases in all and the same stands explained as he has annexed the orders.

¶11

Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The applicant is languishing in jail since 19.12.2022. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but has not disputed the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for

¶13

the applicant.

¶14

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and 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.

¶15

Let the applicant- Sushil Kumar 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.

¶16

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

¶17

(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 229A IPC.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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.

¶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 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.

¶22

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶23

Order Date :- 29.5.2023\Shalini

¶24

Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sushil Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushil 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

Vijay Lakshmi Singh Vs State of U.P.

Durgesh Tiwari Vs State of U.P. . and Another

Rajkumar Srivastava Vs State of U.P.

Shamshad Vs State of U.P.

Veer Singh Chauhan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dr. Parvez Ahmad Vs State of U.P.