Allowed

Raj Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Jan 2023BAIL/31886/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 31886 of 2022, the Allahabad High Court, examining an application under Sections 302, 307 IPC, granted bail by allowing the application on a prima facie case of parity with released co-accused, subject to standard judicial conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions against tampering with evidence or witnesses and regular appearance in court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31886 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Raj Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant in Case Crime No. 231 of 2021, under Sections 302, 307 I.P.C., Police Station Kayamganj, District Farrukhabad with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶7

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant in the FIR. Although as per FIR one person was done to death and two received injuries in the said incident but what actual role was played by the applicant has not been made clear in the FIR. or in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. It is also argued that if weapon assigned to the applicant is also taken into consideration then also only "Danda" has been assigned to the applicant. It is submitted that co-accused person namely, Santoshi Devi has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 04.07.2022 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 7755 of 2022 . He further submits that since the role of the applicant is identical to that of the co-accused who have already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. Learned counsel for the applicant lastly submits that the applicant is in jail since 22.07.2021 having no criminal history and that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. However, it is not disputed the fact that the similarly placed co-accused have been granted bail by this Court.

¶9

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A. G. A. and the fact that identically placed co-accused has already been enlarged on bail, without

¶10

expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out.

¶11

The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant Raj Kumar in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶13

(1). The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence during the trial.

¶14

(2). The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶15

(3). The applicant will appear before the trial Court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶16

(4). 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 officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 3.1.2023 T.S.

¶19

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

Raj Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajendra Vs State of U.P.

Ayushpal Alias Chintu Vs State of U.P.

Manish Khandelwal Vs State of U.P.

Ilias @ Lalla Vs State of U.P.

Ram Milan@ Pawan Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rajat Gupta Vs State of U.P.