Kuldeep Vs State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 74

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4382 of 2023

Applicant :- Kuldeep Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Aman Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of the bail application, the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.276 of 2022 at Police Station-Bhamora, District-Bareilly under Sections 420, 467, 468, 504, 506 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 27.11.2022.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 20.12.2022.

¶7

The following arguments made by Shri Aman Kumar, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Munne Lal, learned A.G.A. for the State from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

¶8

(1). The delay of three years in lodgment of the F.I.R. is fatal to the prosecution case.

¶9

(2). The applicant did not induce the informant to part with money with the promise of a government job. (3). The applicant had a long standing money dispute with the informant and is not a beneficiary of any illicit transaction.

¶10

(4). The F.I.R. has been lodged to escape payment of dues.

¶11

(5). The F.I.R. taken on its face value discloses that the informant had actually conspired to bribe a public servant. [ Ref : Smt. Gopa Chakravarthy Vs. State of U.P. reported at 2012 (76) ACC 83 ].

¶12

(6). Prosecution evidence does not connect the applicant with the offence.

¶13

(7). The applicant has explained his criminal history. It is also contended that the applicant belongs to poor economic strata of the society and is a convenient scapegoat for the police authorities. The applicant has been falsely nominated in another case only to burnish the credentials of the police authorities. The said case has no bearing on the instant bail application.

¶14

(8). The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to cooperate with the court proceedings. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.

¶15

However, learned AGA points out that the applicant has one more criminal case pending against them.

¶16

Rejoining the issue and relying on the instructions received by the learned A.G.A., learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant is a financially destitute person who is in jail. He does not have an effective pairokar. Hence details of the said case could not be searched out and stated earlier in the bail application. However, on the basis of the records available with the AGA and instructions obtained from the applicant, it is contended that the applicant was falsely nominated in the said case only to show the proficiency of the police investigators. The said criminal case does not depict commission of any heinous crime by the applicant and has no bearing on the instant case.

¶17

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶18

Let the applicant-Kuldeep be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶19

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial.

¶20

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

¶21

Order Date :- 9.2.2023 Ashish Tripathi

¶22

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH NAYAN TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kuldeep v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuldeep v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Imran @ Tatti @ Kala Vs State of U.P.

Sumit Rathi Vs State of U.P.

Jagpal Vs State of U.P.

Noor Mohammad Vs State of U.P.

Rahul Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Meera Devi and Another Vs State of U.P.