Allowed

Dharmendra Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Mar 2023BAIL/59122/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal bail application of Dharmendra Kumar. The court noted the applicant's role as mere exhortation, distinct from the accused who caused fatal injuries, and found a prima facie case sufficient for bail with personal bond and sureties under specified conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, and six specific conditions regarding witness tampering, trial cooperation, and attendance.

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

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 59122 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Prakash Prasad,Anil Kumar,Savan Kumar

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Raghuraj Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

Heard Jai Prakash Prasad, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Raghuraj Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Pankaj Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant application for bail has been moved on behalf of the applicant- Dharmendra Kumar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 169 of 2022 under Section 323, 504 and 302 I.P.C. District- Utraon, District- Prayagraj, during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The F.I.R. has been lodged with inordinate delay of one day. The F.I.R. has been lodged due to old enmity between the applicant and the informant. Only one injury was noticed by the doctor on the person of the deceased which as per the version of the F.I.R. and as per the statement of the eye witnesses, has been caused by coaccused Sunil Kumar. The only role assigned to the applicant is that of exhortation. No incriminating article has been recovered from or on the pointing out of the applicant. The role of the applicant is completely distinguishable to that of other co-accused person who have been alleged to have caused the fatal injury. It has been submitted that the accused/applicant has no previous criminal history and is languishing in jail since 22.09.2022.

¶9

Lastly, it has been submitted that in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and he will also fully cooperate with the trial court in getting the trial concluded expeditiously. He has also submitted that the applicant will not intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail.

¶11

Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of record, it transpires that the only role assigned to the applicant is that of exhortation and the role for causing head injury to the deceased has been assigned to the coaccused Sunil Kumar, thus, the role of the applicant is different to that of other co-accused.

¶12

Considering the rival submissions and the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, a case for bail is made out. The bail application is, thus, allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant, Dharmendra Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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 officer;

¶18

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence, in case the witnesses are present in court;

¶19

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, default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the

¶20

trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶21

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

¶22

It is made clear that the trial of the aforesaid case shall be conducted without being influenced by any observation made herein above which are confined to the disposal of the instant application for bail.

¶23

Order Date :- 13.3.2023 S.Verma

¶24

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dharmendra Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharmendra Kumar 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

Lalbrat Yadav and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Prem Prakash Sahni Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajendra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sonu Vs State of U.P

Sudhakar Vs State of U.P.

Anil Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others