Vikas Kumar v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48456 of 2023 Applicant :- Vikas Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akhil Ranjan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Saurabh Shukla Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Saurabh Shukla, learned counsel for informant and Shri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶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. 607 of 2023, under Sections 307, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station - Khorabar, District-Gorakhpur, during the pendency of trial.

¶3Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the First Information Report and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant was subsequently named in the statement of the informant before the police authorties. It is next contended that identically placed co-accused Badku @ Arvind Yadav has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 28.11.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 48331 of 2023. The applicant claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 10.09.2023 having no criminal history and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶4Counsel for informant and learned AGA have 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 FIR. Identically placed co-accused Badku @ Arvind Yadav has been granted bail by this Court. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant has remained confined for more than two months and after submission of the charge-sheet 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 delay the trial 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 Vikas Kumar, involved in the 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 the conditions that he:

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶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 :- 6.12.2023 Sharad/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad