Allowed

Krishna Kumar @ Kallu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Aug 2024/9090/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the High Court allowed the applicant to be released on a personal bond and sureties. The court held it was a fit case for bail given the applicant's lack of antecedents and inability to flee or tamper with evidence, imposing standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

The bail application is allowed. The applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with conditions imposed in the interest of justice.

Krishna Kumar @ Kallu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9090 of 2024 Applicant :- Krishna Kumar @ Kallu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arjun Kumar Kaushal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶4

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 11.12.2023 at about 12:00 pm, a resident of village Rasoolpur Kushahari Durgesh was running his cow in the field of the complainant and due to that, the barricading of the field was broken. Thereafter an altercation took place between them. Durgesh called other accused persons and thereafter along with them, by hurling abuses beaten the complainant and Suraj Lal by danda.

¶5

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there are two injured in this case. Injured Sooraj Lal's name does not find place in the charge sheet. General allegations have been levelled on four persons for assaulting the complainant and Sooraj Lal. Injured Sooraj Lal received a fracture at left temporal bone in parietal region. The applicant is languishing in jail since 24.03.2023 without having any criminal antecedent.

¶6

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶8

On due consideration to the fact that charge sheet in the case has been filed; general allegations have been levelled on all the accused persons, coupled with the fact that the applicant is

¶9

languishing in jail since 24.03.2023 without having any criminal antecedent and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶10

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant, Krishna Kumar @ Kallu, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 185/2023, under Sections 308/323/427/504 IPC, Police Station - Mawai, District - Faizabad/Ayodhya, 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

(iii) 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.

¶15

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

¶16

(v) 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.

¶17

(vi) 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.

¶18

Order Date :- 27.8.2024/R.C.

¶19

Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Krishna Kumar @ Kallu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Kumar @ Kallu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Raj Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Dept. Home Civil Secrett. Lko.

Mohd. Haneef Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Rajan Singh @ Raunak Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow and Others

Sanjay Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko

Dharmendra Prajapati vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Suraj Dhanraj Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another