Allowed

Shiv Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Feb 2023BAIL/25009/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 376, 504, 506 IPC, the High Court allowed bail noting the victim’s hostility towards the prosecution and lack of cogent evidence. The applicant was directed to furnish a bond with sureties and adhere to specific conditions regarding trial court appearances.

What did the court decide?

Applicant allowed bail on personal bond with two sureties on conditions including attendance for recording of statement and严防 adjournments.

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

¶1

Court No. - 81

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25009 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Shiv Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Abrar Khan,Asheesh Kumar Tiwari,Ram Bahadur Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.

¶5

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 804 of 2020, under Sections 376, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kokhraj, District Kaushambi, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶6

Heard Sri Ram Bahadur Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri D.P.S. Chauhan, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State respondent.

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submitted that the victim is a married lady and she has been examined as P.W. 1 before trial Court wherein she has not supported the version of the prosecution and declared hostile. He further submitted that there is no cogent evidence against the applicant connecting him with the alleged offence and there is no chance of the applicant's fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. He further submitted that the accused applicant is not having any criminal history as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 24 of the afÏdavit filed in support of the bail application. The accusedapplicant is languishing in jail since 23.12.2020, as such, he may be enlarged on bail.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State respondent opposed the bail application of the accused applicant but did not dispute the

¶9

aforementioned facts as submitted by the learned counsel for the accused applicant.

¶10

Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, specially the statement of the victim made before the trial Court wherein she has not supported the case of the prosecution, it appears just to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶11

Accordingly, the bail application filed on behalf of applicant is allowed .

¶12

Let the applicant Shiv Kumar involved in Case Crime No. 804 of 2020, under Sections 376, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kokhraj, District Kaushambi, 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;

¶13

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(iv) 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

¶17

the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient 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.

¶18

(v)The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the ofÏcial website of High Court Allahabad.

¶19

(vi) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶20

(vii) The concerned Court/Authority/OfÏcial shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the ofÏcial website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶21

It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.

¶22

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶23

(Mrs. Saroj Yadav, J.)

¶24

Order Date :- 6.2.2023 Arun

¶25

Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shiv Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv 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

Pawan Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Pramod Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Nilesh Kumar @ Dheeraj Vs State of U.P.

Satya Prakash Rao Vs State of U.P.

Shabbir and Another Vs State of U.P.

Rahul Singh Vs State of U.P and Another