Allowed

Lalu Kumar @ Chandrakeshwar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Oct 2023ABAIL/11383/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court granted anticipatory bail to an applicant facing charges of attempted murder and criminal intimidation, directing release upon furnishing a bond and furnishing sureties subject to specified conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties each of like amount and specific conditions regarding conduct and presence at trial.

Lalu Kumar @ Chandrakeshwar Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11383 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Lalu Kumar @ Chandrakeshwar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Siddharth Saran Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶6

This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 478 of 2023, under sections 307, 504 IPC, P.S. Bansgaon, District Gorakhpur during the pendency of application.

¶7

As per prosecution story, four persons came at the residence of the informant on two motor cycle and Lalu was driving one motorcycle and co accused was pillion rider, and started abusing the informant and when informant stopped them from abusing, thereafter all the accused persons instigated co accused Ankit Yadav, who is said to have opened fire by his country made pistol.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is a case of no injury therefore no offence under Section 307 IPC is made out against the applicant. Applicant is a student of Class XI. It is further submitted that investigation is going on and charge sheet has yet not been submitted. The applicant is having definite apprehension that he may be arrested by the police any time.

¶9

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the said facts.

¶10

Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicant, he is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State

¶11

(NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98 . The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶12

In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant Lalu Kumar @ Chandrakeshwar involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

(1) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation;

¶14

(2) 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 or to any police officer; and

¶15

(3) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶16

(4) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.

¶17

(5) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.

¶18

(6) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

¶19

(7) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii)

¶20

framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against his in accordance with law.

¶21

In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶22

With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 16.10.2023 RavindraKSingh

¶23

Digitally signed by :- RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Lalu Kumar @ Chandrakeshwar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalu Kumar @ Chandrakeshwar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mukesh Sahu Vs State of U.P.

Chotu @ Dharmendra Yadav and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Prakash Singh @ Deepak Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sulaiman Vs State of U.P.

Purananand Vs State of U.P.

Vivek Vs State of U.P.