Allowed

Mangal Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt.

Allahabad HC6 Nov 2024BAIL/7226/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was allowed for the applicant charged with attempt to murder, hurt, and illegal possession of arms. The court noted minor injuries, lack of prosecution witnesses examined, and prior bail for co-accused. The applicant was released on a personal bond with two sureties and standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence and appearing regularly.

Mangal Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home… — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:79438

¶2

Court No. - 29

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7226 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mangal Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Counsel for Applicant :- Neeraj Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Neeraj Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anant Pratap Singh, the learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

By means of this application the applicant is seeking his release on bail in Case Crime No./F.I.R. No. 46 of 2023 under Sections 307,323,336,504,506, I.P.C. and Section 3/25/27, Arms Act, P.S. Bihar, District Unnao.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 08.03.2023 against three persons, including the applicant, stating that the applicant started abusing the informant’s son during Holi celebration and when he objected, the applicant started beating him. The co-accused persons indulged in stone-pelting and the applicant fired a shot with an illegal pistol, due to which the informant’s son got hit in his left thigh.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the medico legal examination report of the victim mentions solitary “lacetated wound circular in shape of 0.5cm. x 0.5cm. size and a shiry bross like metal was seen in the wound, about 15cm above (Rt.) knee. It has been further submitted that in the statement of the informant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. he has levelled similar allegations against all the three accused persons, however, the injured has stated that the applicant had fired the shot, which hit him. Both the co-accused persons have been granted bail and copies of their bail orders are annexed as Annexure No. 11 to the affidavit. The applicant is languishing in jail since 12.03.2023 and not even a single witness has been examined till date. In para 22 of the affidavit the applicant’s involvement in another case has been disclosed, in which a

¶10

notice under Section 41-A, Cr.P.C. has been issued.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail-application and he has submitted that since the injured has specifically assigned the role of firing to the applicant, his case is not at par with the case set up against the co-accused persons, who have been granted bail.

¶12

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the victim has suffered a solitary wound on his thigh; both the co-accused persons have already been granted bail, and that the applicant has no previous criminal history and is in jail since 12.03.2023 without examination of any prosecution witness, I am of the view that the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail. The application is accordingly allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant- Mangal Kumar S/o Dulla alias Kamlendra be released on bail in Case Crime No./F.I.R. No. 46 of 2023 under Sections 307,323,336,504,506, I.P.C. and Section 3/25/27, Arms Act, P.S. Bihar, District Unnao, District Lucknow on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶18

( Subhash Vidyarthi, J. )

¶19

Order Date :- 29.11.2024 A.Nigam

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mangal Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mangal Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt.

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.