Vipul Dubey Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2020)

Vipul Dubey Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2020)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail refused. Applicant permitted to appear and surrender before the court below within 45 days and apply for regular bail, to be considered and decided as per Amrawati (2004 (57) ALR 290) and Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh (2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC)); no coercive action till surrender; coercive action if he fails to appear; no further time for surrendering.

Issue for consideration

Whether applicant Vipul Dubey is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in Case Crime No. 165 of 2018 (Sections 323, 506, 304 IPC, Police Station Chilh, District Mirzapur) during pendency of trial.

Court's answer

After considering the rival submissions, the applicant is not entitled to be granted anticipatory bail.

Ratio / Principle

The offences alleged are prima facie made out from the allegations in the FIR.

Key takeaways

In the entirety of facts and circumstances, the applicant is directed to appear and surrender before the court below within 45 days and apply for bail; his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided as per the settled law in Amrawati (2004 (57) ALR 290) and Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh (2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC)).ratio¶12
Till surrender before the court below within the aforesaid period, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant.ratio¶14
In case the applicant does not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — S. 438 Cr.P.C. — Applicant Vipul Dubey sought anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 165 of 2018, Sections 323, 506, 304 IPC, Police Station Chilh, District Mirzapur, U.P. (FIR allegation: informant's brother, who worked at the applicant's house, was not paid wages and was badly beaten). Held, dismissing the anticipatory bail prayer: the offences alleged are prima facie made out from the allegations in the FIR and the applicant is not entitled to anticipatory bail. However, in the entirety of facts and circumstances, the applicant was directed to appear and surrender before the court below within 45 days and apply for bail; his bail prayer was to be considered and decided as per the settled law laid down in Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P., 2004 (57) ALR 290, and Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P., 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC). No coercive action was to be taken till surrender; failure to appear would invite coercive action, and no further time would be granted. Co-accused Banwari Lal Dubey had already been granted bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4411 of 2019. Application finally disposed of (Siddharth, J.; Order Date 18.11.2020).

Court No. - 70

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6572 of 2020

Applicant :- Vipul Dubey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Harsh Dwivedi,Aravind Kumar Tripathi

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

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

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Vipul Dubey, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 165 of 2018, under Sections- 323, 506, 304 IPC, Police StationChilh, District- Mirzapur, U.P., during pendency of trial.

There is allegation in the FIR that brother of the informant went to work with the applicant at his house. After working, he demanded wages, but no money was paid to him and he was badly beaten.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that it is a case of false implication. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. Co-accused, Banwari Lal Dubey, has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.4411 of 2019.

Learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer of applicant for grant of anticipatory bail.

After considering the rival submissions this court finds that the applicant is not entitled to be granted anticipatory bail. The offences alleged are prima facie made out from the allegations in the FIR.

However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 45 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided as per the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court

reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.

Till then no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant.

However, in case, the applicant does not appears before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

It is made clear that the applicant will not be granted any further time by this court for surrendering before the court below as directed above.

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.

Order Date :- 18.11.2020 Ruchi Agrahari

Digitally signed by JUSTICE SIDDHARTH Date: 2020.11.20 10:19:41 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad