Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Munesh Kumar v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 20579 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 21562 (21 December 2006)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).




Munesh Kumar Vs. State of U.P.

Hon. Mrs. Poonam Srivastav, J.

Heard Sri V.P. Srivastava, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Anoop Trivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri G.S. Chaturvedi Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Amit Daga for the complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

This is second bail application of the applicant. The first bail application was rejected on 24.7.2003.

The submission on behalf of the applicant is that charge sheet has been submitted and the proceedings have been got stayed at the behest of all the accused under Section 482 Cr.P.C., since the investigation is complete and there is no likelihood of the trial to come to an end on account of the interim order staying the trial, therefore, the applicant is entitled for bail.

The bail application has been emphatically opposed by Sri G.S. Chaturvedi that there is no changed circumstances which warrant grant of second bail. Besides, since the proceedings have been got stayed by the applicant himself, this can be no ground for grant of bail. The allegations against the accused are very serious in nature. The letters of Chief Secretary and various other high officials were forged. The delay in disposal of Criminal Misc. application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is deliberate, on the part of the accused himself, only to make out a ground for grant of bail. Counter affidavit has been filed but no rejoinder affidavit has been filed. In the circumstances, the complainant's counsel states that this alone can not be said to be a ground for grant of second bail.

Learned A.G.A. has also stated that there has to be some fresh ground for grant of second bail, merely saying that the accused is languishing in jail since six months, is not sufficient since the trial has been stayed by the accused himself. Besides, before lodging of the first information report, a detailed inquiry was conducted and after the involvement of the applicant was confirmed, the report has been registered. In the event, the applicant is released on bail, the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at the instance of the accused, will continue and process of law will stand completely frustrated.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail. The applicant should make every endeavour to get the Criminal Misc. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. decided at an early date. The bail application is rejected.

Dt/- 21.12.2006.



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.