Allowed

Krishan Kumar Bhardwaj v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Apr 2023BAIL/4655/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court disposed of a bail application under CrPC 1973 regarding offences under IPC 1860. The court considered overcrowding and fundamental right to speedy trial, allowing bail despite serious charges without expressing an opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions preventing tampering with evidence/witnesses and ensuring appearance in court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4655 of 2021 Applicant :- Krishan Kumar Bhardwaj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satish Kumar Tyagi,Ashok Kumar Mishra,Diwan Saifullah Khan,Rajendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶5

There is allegation against the appellant that he entered into the house of the informant and after catching hold of the victim, he committed the offence under Sections 354 and 506 IPC and thereafter vanished.

¶6

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the allegations were subsequently intensified by the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C and the allegation of rape was levelled against the appellant on the threat of showing her nude video. He has submitted that no such video was recovered by the investigating officer. The implication of the appellant was made under Section 376 IPC only to get compensation from the state government. The applicant is in jail since 24.11.2020 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶7

On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 ; considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶9

Let the applicant, Krishan Kumar Bhardwaj, involved in Case

¶10

Crime/ F.I.R No. 673 of 2020, under Sections- 354, 506, 376 and 323 IPC, Police Station- Loni Border, District- Ghaziabad, 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 following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶11

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶12

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶13

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶16

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶17

Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶18

Order Date :- 25.4.2023 Rohit

¶19

Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Krishan Kumar Bhardwaj v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishan Kumar Bhardwaj 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abhishek Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mithlesh Kumar Mishra @ Mithlesh Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satyanarayan Tiwari and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Abdul Rahman Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jalees Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rakesh Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others