Allowed

Prabhu Chauhan and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Dec 2018BAIL/38106/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed bail for applicants Prabhu Chauhan, Mallu Chauhan and Uma Chauhan against State of U.P. in a charge-sheeted murder case, relying on the principle of parity with co-accused already granted bail and satisfying the court regarding security and conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions not to tamper evidence, intimidate witnesses or commit similar offences.

Prabhu Chauhan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38106 of 2017

¶3

Applicant :- Prabhu Chauhan And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Chandra Srivastava,Sunita Sharma

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Man Bahadur Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶6

None is present on behalf of complainant even in the revised list/call.

¶7

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

¶8

According to prosecution case, the F.I.R. was lodged against nine accused persons, namely Prabhu Chauhan, Uma Chauhan, Virendra, Chandan Chauhan, Manish Chauhan, Rajkumar Chauhan, Mallu Chauhan, Prem Chauhan and Kapil Chauhan alleging that on 23.6.2017 they assaulted Sonarmi Devi. She received three injuries, one is on head, resultantly died.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that coaccused-Virendra Chauhan, Prem Chauhan, Manish Chauhan, Raj Kumar Chauhan, Chandan Chauhan and Kapil Chauhan have been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders dated 21.2.2018, 5.9.2017, 13.11.2018 and 3.12.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application nos. 6600 of 2018, 27210 of 2017, 38108 of 2017 and 50882 of 2017 and the case of the applicants is identical to the case of coaccused who have been enlarged on bail; hence the applicants are also entitled to bail on the ground of parity; applicants are languishing in jail since 30.6.2017 (near about one and half years); having no criminal history; the applicants are innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case; general role has been assigned against the applicants; it is not clear who is the author of that injury; there is no independent witness and in case they are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial. Learned counsel for the applicants further submitted that there is no possibility of case being decided in near future.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicants and admitted that the case of the applicants is identical to the case of co-accused-Virendra Chauhan, Prem Chauhan, Manish Chauhan, Raj Kumar Chauhan, Chandan Chauhan and Kapil Chauhan, who have been enlarged on bail.

¶11

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.

¶12

Let the applicants Prabhu Chauhan, Mallu Chauhan and Uma Chauhan involved in Case Crime No. 313 of 2017, under Section 147, 308, 304, 323, 325, 504 IPC, Police Station-Mohammadabad, 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 applicants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

4.The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are 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 them 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 :- 18.12.2018 A. Singh

Prabhu Chauhan and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabhu Chauhan and 2 Others 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

Deepak Vs State of U.P.

State of U.P. Vs Arvind and 5 Others

Dr. Pawan Choudhary Vs State of U.P.

Dharm Raj Vs State of U.P.

Vidyadhari Vs State of U.P.

Imran Vs State of U.P.