Allowed

Satish Chandra Nishad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC24 Sept 2019BAIL/38648/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This anticipatory bail application was allowed. The court held that the applicant, though not named in the FIR, was falsely implicated and is cooperative. Bail was granted subject to furnishing a bond and compliance with specific conditions regarding investigation participation and international travel.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant directed to furnish a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties and comply with specified conditions.

Satish Chandra Nishad Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38648 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Satish Chandra Nishad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mahendra Kumar Singh Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Yogeshwar Rai, learned A. G. A. for the State and Sri Gauri Shankar Yadav, learned counsel for the Electricity Department.

¶6

Applicant has moved the present anticipatory bail application seeking bail in Case Crime No. 300 of 2018 u/s 420, 467, 468, 471, 411, 201, 120B IPC and 136, 137 of the Electricity Act, 2003 PS Panki District Kanpur Nagar.

¶7

I have perused the prosecution story as set up in the F.I.R. and also the anticipatory bail rejection order.

¶8

Contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case; the applicant has not been named in the FIR; the persons who have been named in the FIR have already been granted indulgence by difference Benches of this Court and their arrests have been stayed till submission of police report under Section 173(2) CrPC, copies of the orders have been annexed at page 33 onward of the affidavit accompanying the bail application; the applicant is ready and willing to participate and cooperate with the investigation and the matter needs deeper and fairer investigation before any arrest should be given effect to.

¶9

Learned AGA and learned counsel for the Electricity Department have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant.

¶10

Keeping in view the reasons as stated above, the facts and circumstances of the case as have been discussed at the Bar of this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the nature of accusation, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

¶11

In the event of arrest of the applicant, Satish Chandra Nishad involved in the aforesaid case, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶12

(i) the applicant will join and participate in each and every aspect of "Investigation" and will lend full assistance to the Investigating Agency even with regard to "discovery of fact" if and when required so by the Investigating Agency or the concerned court;

¶13

(ii) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶14

iii) 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 office;

¶15

(iv) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

¶16

In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/Investigating Officer/first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶17

Order Date :- 24.9.2019 SP

Satish Chandra Nishad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satish Chandra Nishad 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

Deepak Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satish Vs State of U.P.

Shabbir Sheikh Vs State of U.P.

Sujeet Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Rathore Vs State of U.P.

Babu Lal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others