Allowed

Abhishek Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Sept 2023BAIL/38091/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal court granted bail to an applicant accused of assault and attempt to intimidate. The court noted the applicant was not a principal offender, injuries were non-vital, and he faced no criminal history despite lengthy detention.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties, subject to appearing in court and not tampering with evidence or witnesses.

Abhishek Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:179730

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38091 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Abhishek Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Omar Zamin Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State-opposite party.

¶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. 540 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 308, 34 and 120B of I.P.C., Police Station- Cantt, District- Gorakhpur, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant contends that the informant is a practicing Advocate at District Court, Gorakhpur. He exerts a considerable influence among the members of the Bar. The Bar Association Gorakhpur has passed a resolution whereby the advocates are declining to contest the case of the applicant. As such, although the bail application was filed before the Sessions Court but the same was not pressed. In order to substantiate the said allegations, counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon the resolution passed by the Bar Association, Civil Court, Gorakhpur dated 24.07.2023 whereby the members of the Bar have resolved to conduct an enquiry against the restaurant known as Rangreza with regard to the parking and construction of the said restaurant. The incident is alleged to have occurred at the said restaurant. It is next contended that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the present case being the employee of the said restaurant. As per the allegations in the first information report, two accused persons and seven eight unknown persons are alleged to have assaulted the informant and another Advocate Sarvesh Tiwari. As per the medical report of the injured, the injured sustained one injury each. The said injuries are simple in nature and are on non-vital part of the body. The case of the applicant will not travel beyond Section 323 I.P.C. It is further contended that the named co-accused, Satish Dwivedi, has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 8798 of 2023

¶9

vide order dated 24.08.2023. The applicant is in jail since 23.07.2023, having no criminal history and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶10

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

¶11

Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender who caused the injuries to the injured. The injuries sustained by the injured persons are on nonvital part of the body. The named co-accused, Satish Dwivedi, has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 8798 of 2023 vide order dated 24.08.2023. Further the applicant has no criminal antecedent and has remained confined for almost two 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 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 Abhishek Kumar, involved in the aforesaid 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 the conditions that he:

¶13

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶14

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶15

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶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 :- 18.9.2023 Sachin Mishra

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Abhishek Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Khadka Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ankur Vs State of U.P.

Jogendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Shahabuddin Vs State of U.P.

Shivcharan Vs State of U.P.