Allowed

Devendra Singh @ Devendra Lodhi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Jul 2020ABAIL/2408/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant for a period of six weeks under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for offences including u/s 376, 354A, 147 and 354 IPC. The court considered the non-vital nature of injuries and lack of criminal history, imposing standard conditions and directing expedited investigation.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted for six weeks on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties each directed to within one week.

Devendra Singh @ Devendra Lodhi Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2408 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Devendra Singh @ Devendra Lodhi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Atiqur Rahman Siddiqui,Lihazur Rahman Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Araf Khan, Advocate holding brief of Sri L.R. Khan, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri A.R. Chaurasia, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. has raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the present anticipatory bail application on the ground that charge-sheet has been submitted against the applicant for the offence in question against which applicant preferred a 482 Cr.P.C. application, i.e., Crl. Misc. 482 Cr.P.C. Application No. 39516 of 2018 which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 5.12.2018 giving liberty to the applicant to move discharge application and till the pendency of discharge application no coercive action was directed to be taken up against him, copy of the said order is annexed at page-76 of the accompanying affidavit. He submits that in pursuance of the said order, the applicant moved a discharge application before the Magistrate concerned, who rejected the said same vide order dated 14.2.2019 and thereafter he preferred a revision before the Session Court which too was dismissed on 21.8.2019 against which the applicant filed Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 9256 of 2019 and Co-ordinate Bench of this Court while disposing of said writ petition vide order 16.12.2019 had refused to interfere with the order of the revisional court and directed the applicant to appear before the court concerned within 30 days and till then no coercive action was also ordered copy of the said order is annexed at page-76 of the accompanying affidavit.

¶7

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that in the meanwhile the C.J.M. concerned vide order dated 10.2.2020 has ordered for further investigation in the matter copy of which is annexed at page-85 of the accompanying affidavit and the said order has not been challenged by the complainant till date. He further submits that in pursuance of the order of the learned Magistrate dated 10.2.2020 further investigation is still pending, hence he filed the present anticipatory bail application.

¶8

He submits that so far as merit of the case is concerned, initially the F.I.R. of the present case was lodged for the offence under sections 147, 354, 354 Ka, 323 I.P.C. which was challenged by the applicant along with three others before this Court in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 22107 of 2018 in which arrest of the applicants was stayed till the submission of the police report under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. by this Court vide order dated 14.8.2018 copy of which is annexed at page-38 of the accompanying affidavit. He submits that there is money dispute between the applicant and husband of the complainant for which two blank cheques were given by the husband of the complainant to the applicant for repayment of the loan of Rs. 8 lakh but the same were dishonoured. He submits that during

¶9

investigation the statement of the victim under section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded in which she made allegation of attempt to rape against the applicant and four co-accused persons and so far as injuries received by the victim is concerned, the same are on non vital part of the body and are simple in nature. He submits that so far as one criminal history of the applicant is concerned, the same is challenged before this Court in Crl. Misc. 482 Cr.P.C. Application No. 17464 of 2017 in which interim protection was granted to him vide order dated 29.5.2017 copy of which is annexed at page-89 of the accompanying affidavit. Except the same, the applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent. Hence the applicant is entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the nature of accusation and the fact that he has no criminal antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

¶12

In the event of arrest of the applicant Devendra Singh @ Devendra Lodhi involved in Case Crime No. 971 of 2018 under sections 147, 354, 354A, 323, 376, 511, 506 I.P.C., police station Kotwali Nagar, District Bulandhshar, he shall be released on anticipatory bail for a period of six weeks from today on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- 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:-

¶13

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

¶14

(ii) 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

(iii) 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 of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶17

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the further investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudice by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶18

The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within one week from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

¶19

The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by it alongwith

¶20

a self attested identity proof of the said person(s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number(s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.

¶21

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶22

Order Date :- 7.7.2020 Shiraz

Devendra Singh @ Devendra Lodhi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devendra Singh @ Devendra Lodhi 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

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Sakshi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Prashant Tiwari and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Pradeep and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Kapil Vs State of U.P.

Shah Alam and 8 Others Vs State of U.P.