Allowed

Jitendra Kumar v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Allahabad HC2 Aug 2024BAIL/8063/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a second bail application for an undertrial accused who had been in custody for over two years without charges being framed. The court ruled that prolonged detention without trial, even for serious offences, justifies release on bail.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:70697

¶2

Court No. - 29

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8063 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Jitendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Durga Prasad,Sonu Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶7

Heard Shri Durga Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Anant Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A. and perused the records.

¶8

This is the second application seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 164 of 2022 under Sections 452, 323, 354B, 506 IPC and Section 67 I.T. Act Police StationSohramau, District Unnao.

¶9

The first application bearing Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.11458 of 2022 was rejected by means of an order dated 21.11.2023.

¶10

While pressing the second application, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 02.08.2022 and although a period of more than two years has expired, even the charges have not been framed till date.

¶11

The purpose of keeping an under trial accused person in custody is to ensure his availability to face the trial. The accused cannot be kept in custody by way of punishment, without the trial being proceeded with. As the applicant is languishing in jail for a period exceeding more than two years without even framing of charges and the offences allegedly committed by him carry a maximum punishment of imprisonment up to 7 years, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant- Jitendra Kumar be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two

¶14

sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶15

[Subhash Vidyarthi,J.]

¶16

Order Date :- 21.10.2024

¶17

-Amit K-

¶18

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

Jitendra Kumar v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Kumar v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Atul Kumar Verma vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Ankit Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Lko

Dinesh Kumar Tripathi and 7 Others vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Smt. Komal Shahi vs Ankur Jaiswal

Mohan Rawat vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Meera Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko