Allowed

Vijay Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Feb 2025BAIL/4839/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under BNS sections for robbery-related offences; applicant not named in FIR, named via co-accused confession. Court granted bail citing parity with identically placed co-accused who had been granted bail, without expressing opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence, cooperating in trial, and abstaining from criminal activity.

Vijay Kumar vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:47960

¶2

Court No. - 67

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4839 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Vijay Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Radhey Shyam Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant; learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.241 of 2024, under Sections 310(2), 317(3), 61(2) B.N.S., P.S. Mohammadabad, District Farrukhabad, during pendency of the trial.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is not named in the F.I.R. His name surfaced in the confessional statement of co-accused Anshuman @ Chanchal. He next argued that identically placed co-accused, namely, Jayant Yadav and Anshuman @ Chanchal have been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 17.01.2025 and 31.01.2025 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application Nos.306 of 2025 and 1715 of 2025, respectively. He further submits that since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of coaccused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. The applicant has no criminal history. He is languishing in jail since 16.11.2024. In case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶9

On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶10

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and the fact that the case of the applicant is similar to that of co-accused, who

¶11

have been granted bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant, Vijay Kumar 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 following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶13

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶14

(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 4.4.2025 Meenu Singh

¶18

Digitally signed by :- MEENU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vijay Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Kumar v. State of U.P.

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

Ajay Kumar Mishra and 6 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Sushila Pal Alias Sushila Devi vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Foolan Dei vs State of U.P through Principal Secretary Home Gov. of U.P at Lucknow

Rajesh vs State of U.P.

Balveer Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Harish Yadav Alias Lallan Yadav vs State of U.P.