Allowed

Ajay Kumar @ Monu and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Allahabad HC6 Aug 2024CRLA/2385/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Appeal No. 2385 of 2024, a bench of the Allahabad High Court granted bail to the appellants initially convicted of offences under Sections 323, 325, 504, and 506 IPC. The court directed release on personal bond with two sureties and 50% fine deposit pending appeal.

What did the court decide?

Appellants released on bail on personal bond, two sureties, and deposit of 50% of the fine.

Ajay Kumar @ Monu and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 11

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2385 of 2024

¶3

Appellant :- Ajay Kumar @ Monu And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Appellant :- Bharat Kumar Dixit Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶5

Order on Appeal

¶6

Heard.

¶7

Admit.

¶8

Summon the trial court record.

¶9

List after six weeks.

¶10

In the meantime, objections may be filed.

¶11

Order on First Bail Application

¶12

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

¶13

A prayer for bail has been made by the appellants in this criminal appeal, which has been filed against the Judgment and order dated 23.07.2024 passed by Additional District and Session Judge-II, Raebareli in S.T. No. 154 of 2014 Inre; State Vs. Ajay Kumar and anr arising out of Case Crime No. 625 of 2013 under Sections 323, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C Police Station - Khiron District Raebareli.

¶14

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that appellants were falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that during trial, appellants were on bail and they did not misuse the liberty of bail. He further submits that trial court failed to appreciate the evidence deposed by the prosecution witnesses in the correct prospective. He further submits that there is no possibility of conclusion of the appeal in near future, hence, the appellant is entitled for bail.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for bail and submits that conviction of the appellants is on the basis of evidence on record.

¶16

Having heard the submission made by learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned A.G.A and perused the material brought on record, this Court is of the view that appellants are entitled to be released on bail during the pendency of criminal appeal before this Court.

¶17

Accordingly, the application for bail is allowed.

¶18

Let the appellants involved in aforesaid case 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 subject to deposition of 50% of the fine

¶19

amount imposed by the trial court at the time of his release along with following conditions:-

¶20

(i) The appellants shall cooperate in the disposal of appeal without seeking unnecessary adjournment.

¶21

(ii) The appellants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶23

As soon as personal bonds and sureties are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the trial court concerned to be kept on record of this appeal.

¶24

It is made clear that realization of 50% fine shall be subject to outcome of the appeal.

¶25

Order Date :- 6.8.2024 Pachhere/-

¶26

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

Ajay Kumar @ Monu and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar @ Monu and 2 Others 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dayaram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Pappu Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Bhallu Alias Virendra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

Sakrun Nisha vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Mansoor Alam Khan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.N Home Lko and Another

Qumar Jahan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko