Mahesh Kumar v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52420 of 2023 Applicant :- Mahesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Hari Bans Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, Prateek Tyagi, 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. 179 of 2023, under Sections 307, 427 I.P.C., Police Station-Rasoolabad, District-Kanpur Dehat during pendency of the trial.

¶3Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. As per the allegations in the first information report the applicant and co-accused Madda @ Chotu are alleged to have assaulted the informant and a lady Smt. Karina on 8.5.2023. Both the injured were examined by the doctor on the same date. The informant sustained three injuries. All the injuries were found simple in nature. The injured Smt. Karina has also received a simple injury. On 12.5.2023 the informant was admitted in a private hospital. The doctor in his statement to the police stated that the injured received a sharp injury on his abdomen. The injury got infected and as such it became serious in nature. Subsequently, in the statement of the informant, the applicant is alleged to have caused the said injury. It is contended that the said statement is an after thought and it discredits the prosecution case. The applicant does not have any criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 3.10.2023. 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 as per the injury report dated 8.5.2023 the injuries received by the two injured were found simple in nature. The applicant did not had any intent to kill the injured persons. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Further the applicant has presently remained confined for more than two 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, Mahesh 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 :- 7.12.2023 S.S. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad