Allowed

Kapil Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Sept 2022BAIL/32414/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge court allowed bail to Kapil Chauhan in a case under the U.P. Gangster Act, 1986. The court observed that the applicant was falsely implicated with no prior criminal history besides the registered case and released him on personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount subject to specified conditions.

Kapil Chauhan Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32414 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Kapil Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nanhe Lal Tripathi,Satish Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 188 of 2022, registered under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangster Act, 1986, Police Station- Badalpur, District- Gautambuddh Nagar, during pendency of the trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the prosecution under the Gangsters Act have been launched against the applicant on the basis of only one criminal case shown in the gang chart in which he has already been enlarged on bail by the court concerned. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that applicant is neither a gang leader nor he has been involved in any criminal activity. It is also submitted that applicant has no any previous criminal history except the case shown in the gang-chart. The applicant is languishing in jail since 05.12.2021. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate in trial.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant.

¶9

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the mandate laid down by Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant, Kapil Chauhan, who is involved in the aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following

¶11

conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶12

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶13

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶14

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶16

Order Date :- 6.9.2022 Sachin/-

¶17

Digitally signed by SACHIN TIWARI Date: 2022.09.07 10:09:44 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kapil Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kapil Chauhan 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Faizan Vs State of U.P.

Vineet Alias Vinay Vs State of U.P.

Yogesh Varma Vs State of U.P.

Guddu Vs State of U.P.

Ankur Vs State of U.P.

Anil Kumar Vs State of U.P.