Amit Kumar v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46631 of 2023 Applicant :- Amit Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Hira Lal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, Sri N.K. Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶2The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 247 of 2023, under Sections 379, 420, 467, 468, 471, 411 I.P.C., Police Station-Saidpur, District-Ghazipur during pendency of the trial.

¶3Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The first information report has been lodged belatedly. The delay is fatal to the prosecution case. False recovery of a motorcycle has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The allegation of changing the registration number plate of the vehicle is false. It is next contended that the pillion rider Krishnadev Prasad @ Krishan Kumar has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 28.10.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 43045 of 2023. The applicant claims parity. The applicant does not have any criminal history. The applicant is in jail since

25.8.2023. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶4Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶5Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The pillion rider Krishnadev Prasad @ Krishan Kumar has been granted bail by this Court. Further the applicant has presently remained confined for almost three months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶6Let the applicant, Amit Kumar involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶7In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 22.11.2023 S.S. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad