Allowed

Mukesh Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Allahabad HC15 Jul 2024/7483/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal miscellaneous bail application was heard wherein the applicant sought bail in a case involving sections 323, 304 IPC. The court, noting general allegations against co-accused and reliance on parity, allowed the bail application without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant Mukesh Kumar on bail with furnishing of personal bond and two sureties on specific conditions regarding court attendance and possession.

Mukesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:47943

¶2

Court No. - 32

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7483 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mukesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- D.P. Dutt Tiwari,Ashok Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶6

1. Case is taken up through video conferencing.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Puneet Kumar Yadav learned Brief Holder for the State.

¶8

3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 280 of 2022 under Sections 323, 304 IPC, Police Station Akhand Nagar, District Sultanpur.

¶9

4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that complainant, who is son of the deceased has levelled general allegation of assault against all the three accused and has mentioned in the FIR that they have assaulted his mother by kicks and fists as well as by sticks. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no specific role assigned to the applicant and it has also not been mentioned in the FIR as to who caused the fatal injury on the head of the deceased. He has submitted that statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of the complainant as well as witness Pushpendra, brother of the complainant have been recorded in which general allegations of assault have been levelled against all the three accused persons. It has been submitted that stick (neem ka danda) has been recovered on the pointing out of the applicant, but the same is not conclusive piece of evidence to implicate the applicant. He has further submitted that there is no intention to kill the deceased as such the case utmost falls within the parameter of Section 304 Part II IPC. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that co-accused Vikas has been granted bail by a coordinate Bench this Court vide order dated 23.05.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail

¶10

Application No.2240 of 2023.Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal history.

¶11

5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the stick has been recovered from the possession of the applicant, as such he is not entitled to be released on bail. On the basis of instructions, he also submits that one other case has been registered against the applicant in Case Crime no. 179 of 2019 under sections 323,504 and 506 IPC in Police Station Akhand Nagar, District Sultanpur.

¶12

6. In rebuttal, learned counsel for the applicant has made a statement at bar that the applicant has no knowledge about the pendency of the aforesaid case, therefore, he could not mentioned the same in the bail application. He also submits that it is a case of minor nature.

¶13

7. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and after hearing learned counsel for the parties and looking into overall facts and circumstances of the case as well as the argument that general allegation of assault has been levelled against all the three accused persons; the argument that the case falls within the purview of Section 304 Part II IPC; the argument that the complainant and his brother Pushpendra in the statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. have levelled general allegation of assault against all the three persons and no specific role has been assigned to the applicant and the arguments that there is no allegation as to who has caused the fatal injury on the head of the deceased, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity.

¶14

8. The bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶15

9. Let applicant, namely, Mukesh Kumar , be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶16

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to

¶17

treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶18

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

(iv) 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 absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶21

It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The Trial Court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything in this order.

¶22

(Brij Raj Singh, J.)

¶23

Order Date :- 15.7.2024 dk/

¶24

Digitally signed by :- DEVENDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mukesh Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Nand Lal Prasad and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Irrigation Dept. Lko. and 2 Others

Vinay Kumar Alias Guddu vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Deenbandhu (According Aadhar Card Deenbandhu Prajapati) vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Abdul Wahid vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Hariom @ Krishna Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko

Haarun vs Union of India (D.R.I)