Allowed

Chhotey v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 May 2019BAIL/18428/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J. allowed bail to applicant Chhotey. The Court relied on the fact that co-accused involving similar roles were already granted bail by coordinate benches, the applicant has no criminal history, and there is no possibility to decide the case quickly. The applicant was ordered to appear and not tamper with evidence.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions including appearance in court and non-tampering with witnesses.

Chhotey Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18428 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Chhotey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mayank Mishra, learned brief holder for the State and perused the record.

¶6

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against three accused persons, namely Udaiveer @ Baba Yadav, Chhote, Mangal Rathaur and two unknown persons alleging that on 5.6.2017 they tried to kidnap the informant, accused persons chased by villagers and informant was rescued. Both sides made indiscriminate firing. Mangal Singh received seven injuries, resultantly died.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that coaccused namely Pankaj @ Yogesh Kumar, Chhotey Singh and Udaiveer @ Baba Yadav have been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 7.10.2017, 30.10.2017 and 13.3.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 38218 of 2017, 41254 of 2017 and 6741 of 2018, since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no possibility to get this case decided in short period in future. Nothing was recovered from the possession of applicant. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. He is languishing in jail since 22.6.2017 (more than one year and ten month) 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.

¶8

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 the case of present applicant is identical to coaccused Pankaj @ Yogesh Kumar, Chhotey Singh and Udaiveer @ Baba Yadav who have been enlarged on bail.

¶9

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.

¶10

Let applicant Chhotey involved in Case Crime No. 308 of

¶11

2017, under Sections 364-A, 307, 504, 506, 304 IPC, Police Station Bakewar, District Etawah 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:

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 1.5.2019 A. Singh

Chhotey v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhotey 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

Shahrukh Vs State of U.P.

Nazarul Vs State of U.P.

Champa Devi Vs State of U.P.

Akhlaq Ahmed Vs State of U.P.

Ranjana Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Nirmala Vs State of U.P.