Allowed

Kishan Singh Chahar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Feb 2022BAIL/3712/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court granted bail to the applicant in a case under the U.P. Gangsters Act. The court noted the applicant was already on bail in two prior cases and granted bail considering the nature of offences, severity, and the prevailing COVID-19 scenario.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount subject to specific conditions regarding interference, attendance, and criminal activity.

Kishan Singh Chahar Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3712 of 2022 Applicant :- Kishan Singh Chahar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Srivastava,Virendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Virendra, learned counsel for the applicant, and Sri Suraj Singh, the learned State Law Officer for the State.

¶5

This bail application purported to be under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. has been moved on behalf of applicant- Kishan Singh Chahar for enlarging him on bail in Case Crime No.374 of 2021, under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police StationSadar Bazar, District-Agra.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that though he has not appended the gang-chart, however, he has come to know that there are two criminal cases shown to be pending against the applicant being Case Crime no. 231 of 2021 under Sections 392 / 411 IPC, in which he stands bailed out in Bail Application No. 3218 of 2021 by the court below on 9.6.2021, copy whereof is at page 22 of the bail application. Learned counsel for the applicant has further invited the attention at page-18 of the bail application, so as to contend that in Case Crime No. 143 of 2021, under Sections 392 / 411 IPC, the applicant has been enlarged on bail on 9.6.2021 in Bail Application No.3213 of 2021. According to learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that in both the said cases, applicant has been enlarged on bail and the invocation in the proceedings purported under the Gangsters Act is thoroughly impermissible and the applicant is languishing in jail since 24.12.2021. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that if the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail, he be enlarged on bail.

¶7

Countering the said submission, the learned AGA has opposed the bail while arguing that barring the aforesaid two cases, there is another case, being Case Crime no.519 of 2021, under Section 307 IPC, which is pending against the applicant. Learned A.G.A, has made the said statement as per the written instructions, so provided to him. However, the learned A.G.A,

¶8

could not dispute the fact that the Case Crime no. 519 of 2021 is post lodging of the present FIR.

¶9

Considering the submissions so advanced by the learned counsel for the parties on the question of bail, prima facie this Court finds that this is a fit case for grant of bail, as in both the cases, prior to lodging of FIR, applicant stands bailed out and so far as Case Crime no. 519 of 2021 under Section 307 IPC is concerned, the same is post lodging of the FIR and the the applicant is languishing in jail since 24.12.2021, as also looking into the nature of acquisition, the evidence collected by the I.O, in support of the charge, gravity of offence, nature and severity of the punishment in the case of conviction, complicity of accused and all attending circumstances.

¶10

Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.

¶11

In the light of the aforenoted discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant- Kishan Singh Chahar involved in aforesaid 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 with the following conditions that :-

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

(v) Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and

¶18

sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶19

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

¶20

Any observations made in granting bail to the applicants shall not in any way affect the learned Trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶21

Taking into consideration that Covid-19 is continuing and due to which certified copy would not be possible to be obtained by the applicant, therefore, if a copy of this order downloaded from the official website of Allahabad High Court and self attested by the counsel for the applicant is placed before the Court, the same would be entertained.

¶22

Order Date :- 21.2.2022

¶23

N.S.Rathour

¶24

Digitally signed by NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR Date: 2022.02.22 11:19:05 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kishan Singh Chahar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kishan Singh Chahar 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

Suresh Singh Rana Vs State of U.P.

Rahul Madheshiya Vs State of U.P.

Devendra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Baij Nath Maurya Vs State of U.P through Its Secretary Home Up at Lucknow

Mujahid @ Soni Vs State of U.P.

Anuj Kumar Vs State of U.P.