Allowed

Vyas Shukla v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko.

Allahabad HC6 Nov 2024BAIL/5182/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application filed by Vyas Shukla. The court observed that the applicant was falsely implicated, two co-accused had been granted bail, and one was acquitted in other cases. Eligibility for bail was determined based on these circumstances.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence and appearing in court.

Vyas Shukla vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:73325

¶2

Court No. - 29

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5182 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vyas Shukla Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Kaushal Kishore Tewari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Kaushal Kishore Tewari, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Gyanendra Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.544 of 2023, under Sections 223/224/511/467/468/471/420/120-B I.P.C., registered at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Sitapur.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 06.09.2023 against six persons, including the applicant. The accused persons included an advocate and three police personnel. F.I.R. lodged by the Inspector Incharge of security of District Court, Sitapur alleges that the informant found an advocate and an inmate sitting on chair inside a lockup and talking to each other. The applicant, who was an accused in another case has been implicated alleging that he had wrongly prepared the requisition for sending the other accused Mujeeb to the court, whereas that accused was not required to attend any proceedings in the court.

¶9

In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant's involvement in

¶10

two other cases has been disclosed in para 26 of the affidavit, in both of which the applicant already stand acquitted. Co-accused Mujeeb has been granted bail by this court by means of an order dated 02.11.2023, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.12981 of 2023. Another co-accused advocate Nitin Gautam has been granted bail by the Sessions Court. The investigation against rest of the accused persons who are police personnel is still pending.

¶11

The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter.

¶12

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that as per the F.I.R. the applicant was an accused in another case and prima facie it appears that he was not legally responsible or otherwise to prepare requisition for sending inmates from jail to the court; that none of the police persons who are accused in the present case has been taken into custody and both the other co-accused persons have been granted bail, whereas the applicant is languishing in jail since 22.03.2015 and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.

¶13

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶14

Let the applicant-Vyas Shukla be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶15

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶16

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶17

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court.

¶18

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶19

Order Date :- 6.11.2024 Ram.

¶20

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

Vyas Shukla v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vyas Shukla v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. 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

Avinash Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

M/S Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Lmt. Thru. Its Dir. Dhananjay Subramanium and 3 Others vs the Directorate of Enforcement (Ed) Deptt. of Revenue Thru. Direct. and 3 Others

Neeraj Kumar Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 4 Others

Mohammad Shahban vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Usman vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Lko. and 3 Others

Pawan Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.