Allowed

Chetan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC24 Apr 2019BAIL/17045/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 17045 of 2019 before Court No. - 77, the Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh, J. allowed the bail of the accused Chetan under Sections 147, 148, 325, and 304 IPC for the offence of murder resulting from a lathi charge after considering the allegations and conduct of co-accused.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each subject to conditions regarding appearance and evidence tampering.

Chetan Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17045 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Chetan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Agrawal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Vakalatnama filed today by Sri Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, Advocate on behalf of complainant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant as well as Sri P.K. Rai, learned brief holder for the State and perused the record.

¶7

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against seven accused persons, namely Sri Krishn, Vikram Singh, Pawan Singh, Chetan Singh, Gopi, Hakim and Harivansh alleging that on 27.11.2018 at 6.15. p.m. they assaulted Sunita, Heera Singh with lathi-danda and iron rod. Sunita received injuries on head, resultantly died.Specific role of assault was assigned to co-accused Vikram Singh and blood stained stick (danda) was also recovered on the pointing out of co-accused Vikram Singh.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that coaccused namely Hakim, Haribansh and Pawan Singh have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 10.4.2019 and 11.4.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 13681 of 2019 and 15047 of 2019, since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of coaccused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. Tthe applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There are general allegations against all accused persons except co-accused Vikram Singh. Main role of assault was assigned to co-accused Vikram Singh. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. The case of applicant is distinguishable from case of co-accused Vikram Singh. There is no independent witness and no legal evidence against the applicant. Nothing was recovered from the possession of applicant. He is languishing in jail since 19.1.2019 (more than three months) having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

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

¶11

history.

¶12

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.

¶13

Let applicant Chetan involved in Case Crime No. 465 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 325, 304 IPC, Police Station Refinary Mathura, District Mathura 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

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

¶16

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

¶17

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.

¶18

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.

¶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 :- 24.4.2019 A. Singh

Chetan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chetan 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

Rambir Vs State of U.P.

Ram Kripal Vs State of U.P.

Viri Singh and Another Vs State of U.P.

Krishna @ Krishna Prasad Modanwal Vs State of U.P.

Urmila Devi and Another Vs State of U.P.

Tara Singh Vs State of U.P.