Allowed

Rinku v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Apr 2023BAIL/9350/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application filed by the applicant, Rinku, who was accused of multiple offences. The Court considered the applicant's arguments regarding false implication and lack of independent witnesses. Bail was granted with specific conditions, and the trial court was directed to expedite the trial.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond with two heavy sureties; trial to be concluded expeditiously within six months.

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

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9350 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rinku Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amitrana,Gopal Misra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pradhumn Kumar Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Shri D.P.S. Chauhan, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that the applicant has not committed the crime as alleged in the F.I.R. It is further submitted that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. It is further submitted that there is no independent witness of the recovery that has been shown against the applicant. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that there is contradiction in the statement of injured Anil, which itself falsify the prosecution version. It is further submitted that there is criminal history of the applicant and the same has been explained in para no. 14 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 01.12.2021.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused, there is no possibility of trial to be concluded in near future and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 , 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 Rinku involved in Case Crime No. 808 of 2021, under Sections 452, 323, 324, 504, 506, 307, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Shahar, District Bijnow be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two heavy sureties (one should be of family member) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions.

¶10

(i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶11

(ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on

¶12

every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶13

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶14

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.

¶15

(v) The applicant will report to the police station concerned every month to show his good conduct and behavior.

¶16

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶17

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.

¶18

Order Date :- 4.4.2023

¶19

Bhanu

¶20

Digitally signed by :- BHANU PRATAP KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rinku v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rinku 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

Azeem Vs State of U.P.

Indra Bahadur Pal Vs State of U.P.

Ramjani Vs State of U.P.

Raju Kashyap Vs State of U.P.

Rajkumar Urf Tarjan Vs State of U.P.

Mohit Vs State of U.P.