Allowed

Kapil v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Feb 2023BAIL/6971/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a bail application for Kapil in Sessions Trial arising from IPC 147, 302, and 201 charges. Granting bail on the ground of parity with co-accused already released, the Court imposed conditions including furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties, ensuring non-tampering with evidence and attendance at trials.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties subject to conditions of evidence protection and court appearance.

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

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6971 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Kapil Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Brajesh Kumar Solanki Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

List has been revised.

¶6

Heard Shri Brajesh Kumar Solanki, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

Applicant seeks bail in Sessions Trial No. 2915/ 2022 arising out of Case Crime No. 93 of 2022 under Sections 147, 302, 201 IPC, Police Station Khurja Dehat, District Bulandshahar, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused persons, Gaurav and Gajendra @ Pradhan have already been enlarged on bail by another Bench of this Court vide common order dated 21.12.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 35458 of 2022 and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 39672 of 2022. The applicant is languishing in jail since 6.4.2022. The criminal history assigned to the applicant stands explained. He further submitted that since the role of the applicant is identical to that of co-accused, who have already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.

¶9

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. on the ground that the applicant has criminal antecedents to his credit. However, the aforesaid factual

¶10

aspects of parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by him.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and also taking into consideration the judgment of the Apex Court passed in the case of Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation , MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 and the judgment of this Court passed in the case of Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Cri.L.J. 938 , 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 on the ground of parity. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶12

Let the applicant- Kapil involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶13

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶14

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

(v) 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 officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation

¶19

application before this Court.

¶20

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

¶21

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶22

Order Date :- 23.2.2023

¶23

Shaswat

¶24

Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kapil v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kapil 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pappi Vs State of U.P.

Vikki Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vimla Vs State of U.P.

Baljeet Singh Vs State of U.P.

Nauminath @ Naumi Vs State of U.P.

Surjeet Vs State of U.P.