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


Vikas Shukla @ Lal Ji Shukla v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 28071 of 2006 [2007] RD-AH 2321 (12 February 2007)


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).


 (Court No. 48)

Criminal Misc. IInd Bail Application  No. 28071 of 2006


Vikas Shukla, alias Lalji Shukla

Son of Shri Subhash Chandra Shukla, R/o M.I.G.

85 Indra Nagar, P.S. Kalyanpur, District

Kanpur Nagar. ..........  ... Applicant ( In Jail).


State of U.P. . ...... Opp.party


Hon'ble Barkat Ali Zaidi, J

1. This is a second bail application of one of the two accused in a  murder case from Kanpur. An earlier bail application was rejected by this Court  vide order dated 27.3.200, copy whereof is attached herewith as Annexure - A for ready reference.

2. The trial is now in progress and two prosecution witnesses have already been examined.

3. The accused-applicant has come to this Court straightaway without applying for bail to the Trial Judge and without obtaining his order.

4. It may not be strictly illegal but it is the established policy , procedure and principle that before coming to the High Court for bail, the order of the Trial Judge or the Sessions Judge should be obtained.  The lacuna in dealing with an application  on which orders of the Trial Court have not been obtained, particularly when the Trial is in progress, is that we do not have before us the views of the judge, whether grant of bail at the particular stage, would in any way, obstruct or implead the Trial or not? and whether in the atmosphere and circumstances surrounding the Trial, it would be appropriate to grant or refuse bail. It is the Trial Judge who is aware of the ground realities and can find out from the police and the prosecutor, whether the grant of bail will have any repercussions on the presentation of witnesses and the progress of the case and whether after release on bail, the accused is likely to intermeddle with prosecution witnesses.

5. All these findings can properly be looked into by the Trial Judge and before, we take a decision in the High Court, we must have the views and the opinion of the Trial Judge, so that, we may assess the situation in proper perspective.  It is, therefore, necessary that  such bail applications should come to the High Court after orders of the Trial Judge have been obtained on same.

6. This court, therefore, refuses to consider the application on merits.

7. Application rejected.

Dt:  12.2. 2007



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.