Dismissed

Tanuj Kumar and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC28 Nov 2019BAIL/52291/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court rejected the anticipatory bail application filed by Tanuj Kumar alleging false implication in a domestic violence case. The court noted the gravity of the offence and the injury sustained by the wife of the accused.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail application rejected; arrest of applicant no. 4 to be stayed until police report is submitted.

Tanuj Kumar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52291 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Tanuj Kumar And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Sharma,Prashant Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A. G. A. for the State.

¶6

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 282 of 2019, under Sections 498A, 342, 354, 323, 504 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Hathras Junction, District Hathras with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.

¶7

I have perused the FIR as well as the order by means of which the anticipatory bail application has been rejected by the court below.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants states that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case by the opposite party no. 2, therefore, the applicants may be enlarged on bail.

¶9

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail with the contention that charge-sheet has been submitted against the applicants and Nanad of the deceased has been exonerated; the marriage of opposite party no. 2 took place with applicant no. 1 about four months back. She has sustained several injuries as pointed out by learned AGA, which copy has not been annexed with the bail application and looking to the gravity of offence, no case for grant indulgence is made out.

¶10

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the impugned FIR and also looking to the seriousness of the allegation as made in the FIR, gravity of offence and the severity of punishment and the fact as advanced by the learned AGA, no case for grant of any indulgence is made out.

¶11

Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is rejected.

¶12

If the applicant no. 4 has not been exonerated, she shall not be arrested till the submission of police report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C.

¶13

Order Date :- 28.11.2019 Dhirendra/

Tanuj Kumar and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tanuj Kumar and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Km. Hema and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shashi Prakash Srivastava and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aayush Khemka Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pankaj Kumar Field Officer Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suleman Kabari Vs State of U.P.

Munnaur Ansari Vs State of U.P.