Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Milan Kumar vs State Of U P And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|25 April, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15350 of 2018 Applicant :- Milan Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Devesh Pratap Singh Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that vide order dated 8.6.2017 in Complainant Case No. 2190 of 2015, four accused persons namely, Chhoteylal, Chandraprabha, Milan (applicant) and Chaman were summoned by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Farrukhabad. Co- accused namely Chhoteylal, Smt. Chandraprabha and Chaman Kumar have already been granted bail by co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 8.11.2017 and 28.11.2017 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 42905 of 2017 and 46151 of 2017, since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is general allegations against the applicant. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. There is no legal evidence against the applicant. He is languishing in jail since 18.2.2018 (more than two months) having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that applicant has no criminal history and the case of the applicant is identical to co- accused Chhoteylal, Smt. Chandraprabha and Chaman Kumar who has been enlarged on bail.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Milan Kumar involved in Case Crime No. 2190 of 2015, under Sections 302/201 IPC, Police Station Kaimganj, District Farrukhabad be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5. 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 or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 25.4.2018 A. Singh
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Milan Kumar vs State Of U P And Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
25 April, 2018
Judges
  • Aniruddha Singh
Advocates
  • Devesh Pratap Singh Chauhan