Allowed

Sharvan Kumar and Another v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Allahabad HC4 Dec 2024BAIL/11643/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, allowed a bail application for applicants accused under various IPC sections. The court found it a fit case for bail considering the general nature of accusations, lack of cogent evidence of presence, and the applicants' lack of prior criminal history, allowing release on personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to conditions regarding interference with evidence and future court appearances.

Sharvan Kumar and Another Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:80704

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11643 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Sharvan Kumar And Another Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to release them on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 462 of 2023, under sections 323,504,506,308 IPC, Police Station- Paraspur, DistrictGonda.

¶8

Contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He further submits that from bare perusal of the FIR, it transpires that general role is assigned to all the accused persons including the present applicants for attacking with lathi over the injured. Even the injured has not assigned any specific role to the applicants. He next added that there is no cogent evidence against the applicants that they were present on the spot. He also submits that the applicants have no previous criminal history and they are languishing in jail since 17.10.2024. Further submitted that the applicants undertake that in case, they are granted bail, they will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicants were involved in committing the aforesaid offence and thus, they are not entitled for any relief.

¶10

Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that general role has been assigned to all the accused persons including the present applicants for attacking with lathi over the injured; even the injured has not assigned any specific role to the applicants; there is no cogent evidence against the applicants that they were present on the spot; the applicants are languishing in jail since 17.10.2024; there is no previous criminal history of the applicants coupled with the fact that the applicants have

¶11

undertaken that if they are granted bail, they will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶12

Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.

¶13

Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicants- Sharvan Kumar and Shubham involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-

¶15

(1) The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶16

(2) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. They shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶17

(3) The applicants 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.; and

¶18

(4) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

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

¶20

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶21

Order Date :- 4.12.2024 Shravan

¶22

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

Sharvan Kumar and Another v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sharvan Kumar and Another v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

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

Sushil Kumar Goswami Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Kamla Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ram Khelavan @ Ramkhelawan Kotedar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Lko and Another

Sunil Kumar Patel vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Rohit Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko

Pankaj Kumar Shukla and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Affairs and 3 Others