Dismissed

Dinesh Yadav and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC8 Aug 2022ABAIL/4618/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order rejects an application for anticipatory bail. The court held that the applicants are not entitled to bail due to the serious nature of the accusations, the grievous injuries sustained by the complainant, and the applicants' criminal history.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail rejected; direction to surrender within two weeks for regular bail consideration.

Dinesh Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4618 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Dinesh Yadav And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Yadvesh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant today, is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.563/2020, under Sections 147/323/504/506/452/354-Ka/308 I.P.C. and 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station-Choubeypur, District- Varanasi with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶8

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have an apprehension that they may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas, there is no credible evidence against them. It was stated that applicant no.1 is ex-village pradhan and that he has been falsely implicated in this case due to political enmity, as the complainant party belongs to the opposite party of applicant. In fact no such incident has taken place, as alleged by the complainant. Except, the injury of one injured, the injuries of other persons have been shown simple in nature. Nothing has been recovered from possession of applicant. Only general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against all the accused persons including applicant and that no specific role has been assigned to applicants. The criminal history of applicants has

¶9

duly been explained in supplementary affidavit and in some of those cases, he is already on bail. The applicants undertake to co-operate during investigation and trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and argued that in the alleged incident, the complainant and his minor daughters were assaulted by the co-accused persons. The complainant has sustained grievous and dangerous injuries and two daughters of complainant have also sustained injuries in the incident. Further, there is criminal history of nine cases against applicants including that of gang-rape and that criminal history has not been properly explained in the supplementary affidavit.

¶11

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations, criminal history of applicants and all attending facts of the matter, the applicants are not entitled for anticipatory bail. Hence the present application for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected.

¶12

However, it is directed that in case, applicants surrender before the court below within two weeks from today and apply for bail, their bail application shall be considered and decided expeditiously, in accordance with settled law.

¶13

Order Date :- 8.8.2022 Neeraj

¶14

Digitally signed by NEERAJ KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.08.11 16:24:10 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dinesh Yadav and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Yadav and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Gokalesh Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mohan Prasad Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Chaman @ Bhoora @ Chaman Prakash Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Yusuf and 4 Others Vs State of U.P.

Muneem and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Omkar Vs State of U.P. and Another