Disposed

Vijay Chauhan v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC3 Feb 2021ABAIL/221/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court rejected the grant of anticipatory bail directly but directed the applicant to surrender before the court below within 90 days. Bail will then be considered as per settled law if conditions are complied with; otherwise, coercive action will be taken.

What did the court decide?

Applicant directed to surrender before court below within 90 days; bail to be considered subsequently; coercive action barred during period if conditions met.

Vijay Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 221 of 2021 Applicant :- Vijay Chauhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Awadh Maurya,Kamalesh Kumar Nishad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶3

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

¶4

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Vijay Chauhan , with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 137 of 2020, under Sections- 354, 507 IPC and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station- Paniyara, District- Maharajganj, during pendency of trial.

¶5

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of material brought on record as well as complicity of accused and also judgement of the Apex Court in the case of P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, AIR 2019 SC 4198 , this Court does not finds any exceptional ground to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶6

However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed, on the request of counsel for the applicant, that in case the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 90 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 asjudgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P .

¶7

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 him.

¶8

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.

¶9

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

¶10

Order Date :- 3.2.2021 / Rohit

Vijay Chauhan v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Chauhan v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harshit and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Kumar Jha Vs State of U.P and Another

Munna Lal Vs State of U.P.

Hamid @ Langada Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jamalu @ Jamaluddin and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Anil Kumar Vs State of U.P and 2 Others