Allowed

Shiv Kumar Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Dec 2018BAIL/12680/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application wherein the applicant, accused of murder under Section 304 IPC, sought bail citing parity with a co-accused who was enlarged on bail, lack of criminal history, and significant custody period. The Court allowed the bail application imposing standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in like amount subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence, intimidating witnesses, and appearing before trial cou

Shiv Kumar Chauhan Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12680 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Shiv Kumar Chauhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Priya Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Pandey,J.C. Singh,Santosh Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶7

According to prosecution case, N.C.R. was lodged against four accused persons, namely Shiv Kumar, Raj Kumar, Mukhlal and Anil alleging that on 13.2.2018 at 2-00 p.m. they assaulted Anta Chand Chauhan. He received three injuries, one is on head and due to head injury he died.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that co-accused Mukhlal has been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.10.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 38288 of 2018 and the case of the applicant is identical to the case of co-accused who has been enlarged, hence the applicant is also entitled to bail on the ground of parity; applicant is languishing in jail since 15.2.2018 (more than nine months); having no criminal history; the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case; general role has been assigned to all accused, it is not ascertained who is the author of head injury of deceased; there is no independent witness and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶9

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 also admitted that the case of the applicant is identical to the case of co-accused who has been enlarged on bail.

¶10

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.

¶11

Let the applicant Shiv Kumar Chauhan involved in Case Crime No. 55 of 2018, under Section 304, 504 IPC, Police Station-

¶12

Madhuban, District-Mau 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:

¶13

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶14

2.The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶15

3.The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶16

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.

¶17

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.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶19

Order Date :- 13.12.2018 OP

Shiv Kumar Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Kumar Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dilip Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Ramashre Nishad Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Sunita Vs State of U.P.

Akhilesh Kumar Vaishya Vs State of U.P.

Parmatma Patel Vs State of U.P.

Anil Chauhan Vs State of U.P.