Allowed

Chandrashekhar @ Lallu @ Murjhur v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Oct 2022BAIL/18951/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail to the appellant charged with rape, observing that reformative theory justifies release despite allegations of false implication. The applicant must furnish a bond and adhere to strict conditions regarding court appearances.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on bail by furnishing personal bond with two sureties (one family member) subject to conditions of appearance and abstention from adjournments.

Chandrashekhar @ Lallu @ Murjhur Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18951 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Chandrashekhar @ Lallu @ Murjhur Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satya Prakash Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Satya Prakash Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I appearing for the State.

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that the victim is a married lady aged about 35 years. Learned counsel for the applicant has next drawn the attention of this Court towards annexure-4 to the affidavit accompanying this bail application, which is the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein the allegation of rape has been levelled against the applicant. It is next contended that the medical report of the victim does not corroborates with the prosecution story. It is next contended that land dispute was going on between the parties and only for putting pressure on the applicant present FIR has been lodged. It is next contended that the there is major contradiction in the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 13.11.2021. It has been pointed out that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶7

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

¶8

Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of

¶9

punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and reformative theory of punishment the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶10

Let the applicant Chandrashekhar @ Lallu @ Murjhur involved in Case No.637 of 2022 (Case Crime No.73 of 2021), under Sections 376 I.P.C., Police Station Jugail, District Sonbhadra be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties ( one should of family member ) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions.

¶11

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶12

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶16

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶17

Order Date :- 17.10.2022 Dev/-

¶18

Digitally signed by DEV PRAKASH Date: 2022.10.18 11:36:40 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Chandrashekhar @ Lallu @ Murjhur v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandrashekhar @ Lallu @ Murjhur 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

Dr. Rajesh Raikwar Vs State of U.P.

Surendra Vs State of U.P.

Praveen Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Yogendra Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mishri Lal Vs State of U.P.

Ram Lakhan Yadav Vs State of U.P.