Allowed

Shiv Prasad Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Mar 2019BAIL/11191/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 376-D IPC for rape charges, this court allowed the application. The applicant, who had been in custody over a year, argued false implication, no criminal history, and parity with a co-accused. The court ruled in favor of bail.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of not interfering in evidence or intimidating witnesses.

Shiv Prasad Chauhan Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11191 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Shiv Prasad Chauhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ganesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Vakalatnama filed by Sri Ashok Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel on behalf of first informant is taken on record.

¶6

This case has been assigned by the Hon'ble The Chief Justice vide order dated 25.3.2019.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant as well as Sri P.K. Srivastava, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶8

According to prosecution case, FIR was lodged against three accused persons namely, Shiv Prasad Chauhan, Ganga Ram Gupta and Adalti Mishra alleging that from December, 2017 till October, 2018 they raped her.

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is languishing in jail since 23.1.2018(more than one year and two months) having no criminal history. He has been falsely implicated. Co-accused Adalti Ram was exonerated. He is Government servant, aged 65 years. Co-accused Gangaram Gupta has already been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.2.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.7232 of 2019 (Bail order produced during argument is taken on record), applicant's case is identical to him and he is also entitled to bail on the ground of parity. The prosecutrix threatened to make her nominee in the service Book. Prosecutrix is married lady and 25 years old. The prosecution case is not supported by medical evidence. She was consenting party and according to 'talaknama' sworn on notary she is married lady and thereafter she was divorced. Hence no offence under section 376-D IPC is made out. FIR was lodged after thought and with legal consultation. There is no independent witness. In case applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶10

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant. He admitted that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶11

Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that applicant raped prosecutrix several times and when she became pregnant she was forcibly aborted.

¶12

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation, period of custody, gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let applicant Shiv Prasad Chauhan involved in Case Crime No.1304 of 2018, under Section 376-D, 377, 343, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Khalilabad, District Sant Kabir Nagar 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:

¶14

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

¶15

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶16

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

¶17

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.

¶18

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.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 25.3.2019 P.P.

Shiv Prasad Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Prasad 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Irshad Quraishi Vs State of U.P.

Sarfaraj Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dilip Kumar Vs State of U.P.

durgesh Vs State of U.P.

Asif Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Kumar Vs State of U.P.