Disposed

Jitendra Kumar @ Jeetu v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC2 Sept 2024ABAIL/8620/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application in an Agra assault case under IPC sections including grievous injury to one victim. The applicant was not named as principal offender by the injured witnesses and had cooperated during investigation. Court granted anticipatory bail with conditions until trial completion.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted during pendency of trial on Rs.50,000 personal bond with two sureties each, with attendance, non-inducement and passport-deposit conditions.

Jitendra Kumar @ Jeetu vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:145145

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8620 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Jitendra Kumar @ Jeetu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

This application under section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.609 of 2022, under sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 308, 452 I.P.C., P.S. Hari Parvat, District Agra.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. As per the allegations in the first information report six persons including the applicant are alleged to have assaulted Nitin Gupta and Anita Gupta. In the opinion of the doctor, the injuries sustained by the injured Anita Gupta were simple in nature. The injured Nitin Gupta sustained eight injuries. The injury no.1 on the head was found grievous in nature. In the statement of both the injured, the applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender, who caused the injury on the head. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The charge-sheet has been filed. The applicant had cooperated during investigation. No custodial interrogation is required. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is next submitted that the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶10

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant and in particular the fact that in the statement of both the injured, the applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender, who caused the injury, the fact that a vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant, the fact

¶11

that the charge-sheet has been filed, the fact that the applicant had cooperated during investigation and no custodial interrogation is required, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report.

¶12

In the event of arrest, the applicant Jitendra Kumar , involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial , on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The applicant shall make himself available on each and every date fixed in the matter by the court concerned;

¶14

(ii) 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court;

¶15

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the concerned court.

¶16

In case, the applicant does not co-operate in the proceedings of the trial, this order shall stand automatically recalled/vacated and the applicant shall be taken into custody, forthwith.

¶17

Further, in default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.

¶18

The application stands disposed of.

¶19

Order Date :- 6.9.2024 S.S.

¶20

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jitendra Kumar @ Jeetu v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Kumar @ Jeetu v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Ravi vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shiv Singh vs State of U.P.

Salim and 3 Others vs State of U.P.

Saddam vs State of U.P.

Kiran Gautam and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Guddi and Another vs State of Up