Vipin Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:217992

Court No. - 64

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46980 of 2023

Applicant :- Vipin Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Singh Tomar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Vipin Kumar, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 321 of 2021, under Sections 34,147,323,304,342,504, 506 IPC Police Station Partapur, District- Meerut, during pendency of trial.

¶8

There is allegation in the First Information Report that deceased had gone to Dhaba to take food where some dispute took place regarding money. Thereafter three persons came in Swift Car and started beating the deceased.Deceased tried to save himself and ran away towards the road where he was hit by a truck. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that no role has been assigned to the applicant. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Even otherwise it is a case of accident.The applicant is in jail since 5.10.2023 and has no criminal history.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶10

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

¶11

of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the 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

¶12

Let the applicant 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.

¶13

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶14

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶15

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶16

That the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police ofÏcer;

¶17

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.

¶18

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)

¶19

recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

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

¶21

Order Date :- 16.11.2023 Atul kr. sri.

¶22

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

Vipin Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vipin 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

Rajesh Rai Vs State of U.P.

Aman Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sanoj Vs State of U.P.

Durvesh Vs State of U.P.

Prempal Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra @ Ramu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others