Ajay Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:170671

Court No. - 74

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34636 of 2023

Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Shoeb Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 45 of 2023, under Sections 307, 323, 398 I.P.C., and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station- Vishunpura, District- Kushinagar during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant was not arrested at the spot. The name of the applicant was disclosed by co-accused Abdul Hameed. The said statement, insofar as it implicates the applicant, is unreliable. No test identification parade was got conducted by the police authorities. The applicant was not identified on the C.C.T.V. clip. False recovery of a country made pistol and a live cartridge has been shown from the applicant. The recovered mobile belongs to the applicant. It is next contended that the co-accused Abdul Hameed has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 20585 of 2023 vide order dated 30.5.2023. The case of the applicant stands on better footing to that of co-accused Abdul Hameed. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 25 of the bail application. The applicant is in jail since 17.2.2023. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶10

Having regard to the submissions made above and the fact that the applicant has remained confined for more than six months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged

¶11

on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶12

Let the applicant, Ajay Kumar involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that:

¶13

i. the applicant shall not temper with the prosecution evidence;

¶14

ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness;

¶15

iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 24.8.2023 S.S.

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ajay Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Monu @ Suraj Vs State of U.P.

Kamu Kuraishi Vs State of U.P.

Ankur Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Chhote Lal Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep @ Chhota Vs State of U.P.