Dismissed¶14

Kuldeep v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Mar 2025BAIL/6668/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application rejected; absconding accused re-arrested; Section 302 IPC murder case; Case Crime No. 1024 of 2009; Police Station Vijay Nagar, District Ghaziabad; misuse of bail liberty; absence about 08 years 03 months 11 days; bail rejected by trial court 21.12.2024; all witnesses of fact examined; directions to Commissioner of Police Ghaziabad for witness presence; expeditious trial without adjournments; High Court of Judicature at Allahabad; Sanjay Kumar Singh, J.; CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 6668 of 2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:31467; Order Date 5.3.2025.

What did the court decide?

Having regard to the stage of trial and the applicant's conduct (misuse of bail liberty and absconding for about 08 years, 03 months and 11 days), the Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. ¶13

Kuldeep vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether bail should be granted to the applicant (earlier on bail, absconding from 11.07.2016 to 22.10.2024, re-arrested) during the pendency of trial in Case Crime No. 1024 of 2009, considering the stage of trial and the applicant's conduct.

¶13

Court's answer

¶13

Ratio / Principle

The bail application is rejected.

¶14

Key takeaways

The Commissioner of Police, Ghaziabad is directed to ensure the presence of all remaining prosecution witnesses on the dates fixed before the trial Court, so that the trial of the applicant may be concluded at the earliest.ratio¶15
Since it is an old case of the year 2009, the trial Court is directed to endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously without granting any adjournment to either of the parties.ratio¶16
Any observations made in this order are confined to the issue of bail and shall not affect the merits of the trial.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Court No. 64), Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh, J. — Order dated 5.3.2025 (Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:31467); Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6668 of 2025. Applicant Kuldeep prayed for bail in Case Crime No. 1024 of 2009, Sections 302 IPC, P.S. Vijay Nagar, District Ghaziabad (FIR 18.09.2009, incident 17.09.2009). He had been granted bail by Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad on 12.07.2013, but absconded from 11.07.2016 (about 08 years, 03 months and 11 days), stalling trial; re-arrested 22.10.2024; trial court rejected his fresh bail application on 21.12.2024 (impugned order). With all prosecution witnesses of fact examined and only formal witnesses remaining, and considering the stage of trial and the applicant's misuse of bail liberty, the Court declined bail and rejected the application; directed the Commissioner of Police, Ghaziabad to ensure presence of all remaining prosecution witnesses and the trial Court to conclude the 2009-case trial expeditiously without adjournments; clarified that observations were confined to the bail issue.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:31467

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6668 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Kuldeep Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sachchida Nand Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State.

¶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.1024 of 2009, under Sections 302 IPC, Police Station Vijay Nagar, District Ghaziabad, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

Brief facts of the case, which are required to be stated are that it is a old case of the year, 2009. The F.I.R. was lodged on 18.09.2009 with regard to an incident, which took place on 17.09.2009 for the offence under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Vijay Nagar, District Ghaziabad. The applicant was granted bail vide order dated 12.07.2013 by Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad. Thereafter, charge was framed against the applicant and he participated in the trial up-to 10.06.2016 but from 11.07.2016, he became absent and absconded, hence, the trial proceedings was held up. After great efforts, applicant was arrested on 22.10.2024 and his bail application has been rejected by the trial court vide order dated 21.12.2024. Hence, the applicant has preferred the instant bail application before this Court with the stand that he was informed that since the prosecution witnesses have not supported the prosecution case, therefore, there was no possibility of his conviction, therefore, there is no need for his appearance before the trial court.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant undertake that in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the trial.

¶10

On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by

¶11

contending that the statement of four prosecution witnesses have already been recorded and efforts are being made from the side of the prosecution for early conclusion of the trial. Considering the conduct of the applicant that he has misused the liberty of bail and was absconding for about 08 years, 03 months and 11 days, he is not entitled to be released on bail otherwise there is every possibility of his absconding again.

¶12

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I find that all the prosecution witnesses of fact have been examined and examination of only formal witnesses are yet to be made.

¶13

Considering the stage of trial as well as conduct of the applicant as noted above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

¶14

Accordingly, the bail application is rejected .

¶15

The Commissioner of Police, Ghaziabad is directed to ensure the presence of all the remaining prosecution witnesses on the dates fixed before the trial Court, so that the trial of the applicant may be concluded at the earliest.

¶16

However, considering the fact that it is a old case of the year, 2009, the trial Court is also directed to make an endeavour to conclude the the trial, expeditiously, without granting any adjournment to either of the parties.

¶17

It is made clear that any observations made in this order is confined to the issue of bail and shall not affect merit of the trial.

¶18

Copy of this order be communicated to the concerned trial Court as well as to the Commissioner of Police, Ghaziabad within 48 hours for necessary information and compliance.

¶19

Order Date :- 5.3.2025 Sanjeet

¶20

Digitally signed by :- SANJEET KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kuldeep v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuldeep v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vikas Yadav vs State of U.P.

Rahul vs State of U.P.

Aman vs State of U.P.

Raman vs State of U.P.

Ramkrit Ram vs State of U.P.

Dharam Nath Yadav and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another