Allowed

Yashpal Alias Kainchi Kushwaha v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Sept 2023BAIL/39502/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application in a FIR involving IPC Sections 323, 325, 354, 452, 307, 504, 506. Considering the applicant was in custody for nearly four and a half months post-charge-sheet and the absence of evidence suggesting tampering or intimidation, the Court granted bail on a personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in like amounts, subject to standard conditions of appearance and non-tampering.

Yashpal Alias Kainchi Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:185069

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39502 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Yashpal Alias Kainchi Kushwaha Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma, J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Atul Kumar Singh as well as learned AGA for the State-respondent and perused the record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 142 of 2023, under Sections 323, 325, 354, 452, 307, 504, 506 IPC, Police StationRamgarh, District-Firozabad, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. In the first information report, two persons have been named as accused. As per the medical report, there was three injuries on the person of the victim, out of which are simple in nature. The injury no. 1 and 2 have been caused by the hard and blunt object which as per the statement of the injured, have been inflicted by the co-accused and not by the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender, who caused injuries to the injured. As a matter of fact, there is political rivalry between the applicant's family and the informant's family due to which the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant in jail since 28.04.2023 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶9

Learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant have 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 almost four and half 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

¶11

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

¶12

Let the applicant Yashpal Alias Kainchi Kushwaha, involved in the aforesaid case 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 :- 25.9.2023 Vinod.

¶18

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

Yashpal Alias Kainchi Kushwaha v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yashpal Alias Kainchi Kushwaha 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

Mohd Sameer Vs State of U.P.

Aryan @ Kanha Vs State of U.P.

Ishwar Dayal @ Patwari Vs State of U.P.

Sudhanshu Ranjan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shyam Babu @ Vishesh Tiwari and Another Vs State of U.P.

Pinkal Kumar Vs State of U.P.