Allowed

Kailash Chandra @ Vidavadi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC29 Aug 2024BAIL/9231/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application for the applicant, distinguishing a coordinate bench order releasing a co-accused with a similar role. Granted bail based on parity, noting the applicant's lack of antecedents and low flight risk.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail furnishing personal bond and two sureties with conditions against tampering evidence, intimidating witnesses, and appearing in court.

Kailash Chandra @ Vidavadi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:59014

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9231 of 2024 Applicant :- Kailash Chandra @ Vidavadi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that four persons including the applicant are named in the FIR. All of them have assigned role of causing fire arm injury. In the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the complainant has not assigned any specific role to anyone, rather role of firing has been assigned to the applicant and co-accused Gokaran @ Kamal Kishor. While giving statement before the Court, specific role of causing fire arm injury has been assigned to Gokaran @ Kamal Kishor who has been enlarged on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.11.2016 passed in criminal misc. bail application No. 7542/2016. He seeks parity with the order of co-accused Gokaran @ Kamal Kishor.

¶7

It is further submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 29.06.2024 without having any previous criminal antecedent. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Learned AGA has opposed the bail application, however, could not dispute the fact it is a case of parity.

¶9

On due consideration to the fact that co-accused Gokaran @ Kamal Kishor who was assigned similar role has been enlarged on bail, coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 29.06.2024 without having any criminal antecedent and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail on the ground of parity.

¶10

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant, Kailash Chandra @ Vidavadi, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 386/2016, under Sections 307 IPC, Police Station - Kotwali Sadar, District - Unnao, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶12

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶13

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶14

(iii) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶15

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶16

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

Order Date :- 29.8.2024 R.C.

¶19

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

Kailash Chandra @ Vidavadi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kailash Chandra @ Vidavadi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sonu Faujdar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Lko.

Syed Mehdi Hasan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Lko. and Another

Sonu Faujdar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Lko.

Monu Rathore Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Munesh Kumar @ Munesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.

Ravindra Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another