Allahabad High Court
Vipin Kumar@ Vipin@ Kaju vs State Of U.P. on 21 July, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:145658
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8147 of 2023
Applicant :- Vipin Kumar@ Vipin@ Kaju
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Tarun Jha
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Tarun Jha, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vijay Singh Sengar, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Deepak Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.65 of 2023, registered under Sections 307, 336, 504 I.P.C. at Police Station- Rendhar, District Jalaun with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant alongwith his brother Raj Kumar @ Raju and other persons Kadhore @ Arvind and Shivam Chaubey are stated to have fired at the informant on 31.5.2023 at about 11:30 p.m., thereby causing gunshot injury to her leg.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation of firing has been leveled against co-accused person Raj Kumar @ Raju and not against the applicant. Thus, the role of the applicant is at different footing to co-accused person Raj Kumar @ Raju. Learned counsel has stated that the prosecution story itself stands falsified from the bare perusal of the injury report as neither any radiopaque metallic shadow has been observed by the doctor conducting x-ray and even the injuries do not indicate to be gunshot injury. There is no wound of entry or exit. The place of injury is below the right knee. There is every possibility of having got the said injury report prepared in collusion. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.
7. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Vipin Kumar@ Vipin@ Kaju be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii). that 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;
(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
9. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.
[Krishan Pahal, J.]
Order Date :- 21.7.2023/ Vikas
