Sunday, 17, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Krishna Kumar @ Judge And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.
2025 Latest Caselaw 9049 ALL

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 9049 ALL
Judgement Date : 16 April, 2025

Allahabad High Court

Krishna Kumar @ Judge And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. on 16 April, 2025

Author: Manish Mathur
Bench: Manish Mathur




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:21393
 
Court No. - 13
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2166 of 2025
 

 
Applicant :- Krishna Kumar @ Judge and Kuldeep Shukla
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Sumit Chauhan,Pt. Devesh Kumar Mishra
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
 

1. Heard learned counsel for applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record.

2. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of State is taken on record.

3. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.37 of 2025 under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, P.S. Ramgaon, District Bahraich.

4. It has been submitted that as per gang chart applicants are shown involved in one case bearing case crime no.153 of 2024 under Sections 364A, 342 & 120B I.P.C. & 3/2 Arms Act in which applicants have already been enlarged on bail in Bail Applications numbered 5998 of 2024 and 6675 of 2024 respectively.

5. It is submitted that apart from aforesaid case, applicants are also shown involved in following cases in which they have already been enlarged on bail.

The case crime numbers are as follows:-

Applicant Krisha Kumar @ Judge

Case Crime No.228 of 2013 - applicant has been enlarged on bail vide Bail Application No.733/12A/2013;

Case Crime No.616A of 2012 - applicant has been enlarged on bail by order of A.C.J.M. Bahraich as evident from the questionnaire annexed with supplementary affidavit;

Case Crime No.794 of 2011 - applicant is enlarged on bail as evident from questionnaire annexed with supplementary affidavit; and

Case Crime No.88 of 2010 - applicant has been enlarged on bail by order of C.J.M. Bahraich;

Applicant Kuldeep Shukla

In Case Crime No.355 of 2023; 689 2022 and 313 of 2021, final report has been submitted against applicant as admitted in counter affidavit filed by the State.

Case Crime No.384 of 2024 - applicant is enlarged on bail as evident from the questionnaire annexed with supplementary affidavit; and

Case Crime No.329 of 2024 - applicant is enlarged on bail as evident from the questionnaire annexed with supplementary affidavit;;

6. Learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute the fact that applicant is enlarged on bail in all the cases indicated against him.

7. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 has specifically held that bail is to be a norm and an under-trial is not required to be in jail for ever pending trial. Relevant paragraphs of the judgment are as under :-

"21. In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty."

"27. This Court, time and again, has stated that bail is the rule and committal to jail an exception. It has also observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution."

8. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, prima facie, and subject to further evidence being led in trial, it appears that applicant has already been enlarged on bail in all the cases filed against him as averred in the affidavit/supplementary affidavit filed in support of the application and therefore conditions indicated in Section 19(4) U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 stand complied with at this stage, therefore the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

9. Accordingly bail application is allowed.

10. Let applicants Krishna Kumar @ Judge and Kuldeep Shukla, involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

(i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

(ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv) The applicants 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. If in the opinion of the trial court, absence of the applicants is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law.

Order Date :- 16.4.2025

kvg/-

 

 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter