The High Court rejected an anticipatory bail application filed by Vaibhav Tiwari in a gang rape case. The court held that custodial interrogation was imperative to probe the matter and was not inclined to exercise powers in favor of the applicant.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12187 of 2021
Applicant :- Vaibhav Tiwari @ Shivam Tiwari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldeep Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard Sri Kuldeep Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.
The present anticipatory bail application initially was registered as case crime no. 188 of 2021, under Sections 376D, 506 IPC and Section 67 Information Technology Act, P.S. Kotwali Mau, District Mau.
From the record, it is evidence that the applicants have approached this Court straightway without their anticipatory bail rejected from the court below.
Prior notice of this bail application was served in the office of Government Advocate and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Vs. State of U.P., hence, this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned AGA as per Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. (U.P.Amendment) is not required.
Learned AGA submits that the applicant is said to have been involved in the case of gang rape, a heinous offence. The accusations made by the victim, against the applicant and his active complicity in the commission of the offence seems to have been committed. Though it is only after the investigation his degree of involvement would be surfaced. The involvement of the applicant and their active participation cannot be ruled
out.
The Court feels that in order to have indepth probe into the matter custodial interrogation is imperative. Learned AGA submits that instant case is not the case of false implication. Thus, giving a panoramic view of the matter the Court is not inclined to exercise its powers in favour of the applicant, and thus the present anticipatory bail application is hereby rejected.
Order Date :- 16.7.2021 Abhishek Sri.
Digitally signed by Justice Rahul Chaturvedi Date: 2021.07.21 13:19:13 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case involving allegations of gang rape under Sections 376D IPC, 506 IPC, and Section 67 IT Act.
Whether custodial interrogation is imperative in view of the heinous nature of the offence.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vaibhav Tiwari @ Shivam Tiwari
State of U.P.
Rahul Chaturvedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
