Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 10963 (ALL)

DINESH KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

ABAIL/569/2025 · 2025-04-08

Vivek Varma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:51832 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 569 of 2025 Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Hasan Parvej Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 2. The present application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant in Case Crime No.200 of 2024, under sections 323, 307, 504 and 506 I.P.C., P.S. Bhuta, District Bareilly. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. In the statement of the injured Jhabbu role of firing has been assigned to co-accused Dharamveer. Further as per the medical report and supplementary medical report the injuries sustained by the injured were found simple in nature. The role of the applicant is clearly distinguishable from that co- accused Dharamveer. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is next submitted that the investigation is going on and the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case. 4. Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant and the fact that in the statement of the injured Jhabbu role of firing has been assigned to co- accused Dharamveer, the fact that as per the medical report and supplementary medical report the injuries sustained by the injured were found simple in nature, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report. 6. In the event of arrest, the applicant Dinesh Kumar, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation; (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court. (iv) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court. (v) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. (vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. 7. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same. 8. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 9.4.2025 S.S. Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad