Allowed

Shiv Nath v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home, Lko.

Allahabad HC13 Apr 2023/5004/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail application filed by Shiv Nath in a case involving Sections 363, 366, and 376 IPC. The court held that the applicant was entitled to bail after verifying facts from previous records, noting his lack of criminal history and the circumstances of the case.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence and appearing in court.

Shiv Nath Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5004 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Shiv Nath Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home, Lko.

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Verma,Neetesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Vinay Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Udai Bhan Pandey, learned counsel for the State and perused the records.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 80 of 2012, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Jahangirabad, District Barabanki.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 28.03.2012 alleging that the applicant had enticed away the informant's minor daughter.

¶9

In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history.

¶10

The applicant and his wife Smt. Anita had filed a writ petition bearing Writ Petition No.5813 (MB) of 2012, in which an order was passed on 18.07.2012 staying the arrest of the petitioners and it was provided that the victim will be produced before the Investigating Officer within one week. After the aforesaid order the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. wherein she has stated her aged to be 22 years and she stated that she loves the applicant and wanted to marry him but her mother-the informant did not agree for her marriage and

¶11

therefore she went with the applicant and married him. In her additional statement the victim has stated that she had delivered a girl child on 29.09.2012.

¶12

It has been stated in the affidavit that after marriage the victim lived happily with the applicant and gave birth to two children but unfortunately she died on 24.06.2019 due to epilepsy stroke and thereafter the informant lodged another first information report bearing Case Crime No.148 of 2020, under Section 302 & 376-D I.P.C. After investigating the police submitted a final report in the aforesaid case.

¶13

The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter.

¶14

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the victim herself had filed a writ petition before this court seeking protection stating that she is major and she has married the applicant and she had given similar statements before the Investigating Officer and before the Magistrate; that two children were born out of the wedlock of the victim and the applicant; that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 07.01.2023 and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am satisfied that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid case crime.

¶15

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶16

Let the applicant-Shiv Nath be released on bail in Case Crime No. 80 of 2012, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Jahangirabad, District Barabanki on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶17

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶18

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶19

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶21

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶22

Order Date :- 13.4.2023 Ram.

¶23

Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shiv Nath v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home, Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Nath v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home, Lko.

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

Chandra Pakash Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Suneel Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru.Secy. Home Deptt.

Shiv Shankar Pathak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

Umar Ansari and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Suraj Alias Lallu Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home and 3 Other

Puneeta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.