Allowed

Aman Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC8 Feb 2024CRLA/375/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appeal and set aside the order rejecting the bail application. The court directed the release of the appellant on bail, considering the merits of the case and lack of evidence of tampering.

What did the court decide?

The appellant Aman Kumar was ordered to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties under specific conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:11905

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 375 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Aman Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others

¶5

Counsel for Appellant :- Brijesh Kumar Shukla,Pradeep Kumar Rai,Prakarsh Pandey,Praveen Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶7

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

¶8

The present appeal has been filed for quashing the order dated 16.01.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Barabanki in Bail Application No. 5681 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 451 of 2023 U/s 452, 376 of I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Haidergarh, DistrictBarabanki; for releasing appellant on bail in the aforesaid case crime.

¶9

It is informed by learned counsel for the appellant that as per his information, notice is already served on informant by police officials of concerned police station, but none appears on her behalf.

¶10

It is conceded by learned A.G.A. that notice is already served by Sub Inspector- Satish Kumar Dixit, Police StationHaidergarh, District- Barabanki on 05.02.2024 on informant of the present case. The written information about the said notice placed before this Court is being taken on record.

¶11

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is aged about 25 years. He further submits that appellant and victim were friends and they were frequently making conversation on phone with each other; as victim was caught by her mother while talking with appellant, the F.I.R. of the case in question was lodged on the basis of incorrect facts. He further submits that during the course of investigation, Investigating Officer failed to consider the call detail records as well as photographs provided by appellant and charge-sheet was submitted by him in the most mechanical manner. He further submits that statements of victim were recorded U/s 161 & 164 Cr.P.C.; as per the contents of statement of victim recorded U/s

¶12

164 Cr.P.C., it is alleged that on 03.12.2023 at about 10:00 to 11:00 P.M., victim was alone in her house, at that time, appellant entered into her house then he committed wrong with her on the point of knife, gave her life threat and after asking her father's name, he went away. It is further submitted that charge-sheet has already been submitted by Investigating Officer and appellant is in jail 06.12.2023, he does not have any criminal antecedent and there is no possibility of tempering of any evidence. It is, thus, submitted that appellant may be enlarged on bail.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer of appellant. He submits that victim has supported the prosecution version in her statement recorded U/s 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. and charge-sheet has already been submitted by Investigating Officer as such there is no illegality in the order passed by learned trial court.

¶14

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of appeal, impugned order, F.I.R., statements of victim recorded U/s 161 & 164 Cr.P.C., medico legal report of victim, call detail records annexed as Annexure No. 09, photographs annexed at page no. 61 of the bail application as well as other relevant documents; it is evident that victim is a major lady and she was in conversation with appellant prior to the date of alleged incident. But all these relevant facts were not considered by the trial court in the correct perspective while rejecting the bail application. Thus, this Court is of the view that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and appellant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶15

Resultantly, in view of the above facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, hence, the appeal has substance and it is accordingly allowed and the order dated 16.01.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Barabanki is hereby set aside.

¶16

Let the appellant- Aman Kumar involved in the aforementioned crime 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:-

¶17

(i) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will 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.

¶18

(ii) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their 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.

¶19

(iii) In case, the appellant 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 appellant 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.

¶20

(iv) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the appellant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶21

Office is directed to communicate this order to the trial court, forthwith.

¶22

Order Date :- 8.2.2024 Arpan

¶23

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

Aman Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aman Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

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

Mintu Pandey @ Mantu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 5 Others

Deepak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow and Anr.

Harishchand Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Arif @ Sonu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Rehan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow and Another

Sangam Kumar Verma @ Sangam Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lucknow