Allowed

Kallu @ Krishna v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Feb 2023BAIL/56567/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed the second bail application of the applicant, who was already in jail since 2016. The court granted bail citing dicta from Apex Court judgments regarding jail overcrowding and fundamental rights, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to standard bail conditions and a direction for expedited trial.

Kallu @ Krishna Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 56567 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Kallu @ Krishna Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shiva Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This is the second bail application.The first bail application was rejected by the coordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 30.11.2021.

¶7

The submission is that co-accused, Jogendra Singh, has already been enlarged on bail vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 49749 of 2017 on 29.9.2022 and the case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail for the reasons given in bail application of co-accused on the ground of parity. The applicant is in jail since 5.12.2016.

¶8

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

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and 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 and 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.

¶10

Let the applicant, Kallu @ Krishna, involved in Case Crime No. 1386 of 2016, under Sections 147,148,149,302,307,34 IPC, Police Station- Loni

¶11

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.

¶12

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶13

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶14

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

¶15

The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected of the commission of which they are suspected.

¶16

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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.

¶18

The court below is directed to conclude the trial against the applicant, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order

¶19

Order Date :- 2.2.2023 Atul kr. sri.

¶20

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

Kallu @ Krishna v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kallu @ Krishna 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

Mazhar Husain Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kanchid Vs State of U.P.

Hinchhlal Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Jayanti @ Longshree and Another Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Prabha Devi and Another Vs State of U.P.

Vijay Tiwari Vs State of U.P.