Dismissed

Durg Vijay Chauhan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC29 May 2023ABAIL/5114/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused the applicant's plea for anticipatory bail in a private complaint case involving IPC offences. While citing precedents, the court held it was not a fit case for bail but directed the lower court to consider the matter in compliance with the Satender Kumar Antil guidelines.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail refused; lower court directed to consider future bail application in light of Satender Kumar Antil.

Durg Vijay Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:119147

¶2

Court No. - 84

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5114 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Durg Vijay Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Satya Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant Durg Vijay Chauhan seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 115 of 2015, under Sections 323, 308, 506, 427 IPC, Police Station Tarawa, District Azamgarh.

¶7

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

¶8

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of his arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. The investigation of the case has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed and cognizance has been taken by the Court concerned. It has been submitted that in case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶9

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

¶10

In this matter, it reveals that after completion of investigation, charge sheet has been submitted and cognizance has also been taken by the Court concerned. Offences levelled against the applicant are punishable with the imprisonment upto seven years. During course of investigation, the applicant has cooperated with the Investigating Officer..

¶11

In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1 , the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the controversy finally by holding the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.

¶12

It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial.

¶13

It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

¶14

Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, in my view, it is not a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant. Prayer made in the application is refused.

¶15

However, it is observed that the bail application of the applicant, if moved, shall be considered and decided by the Court concerned in terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825 .

¶16

On the basis of request of the learned counsel for the applicant, it is further directed that the Court concerned while considering the bail application of the applicant in the light of Satender Kumar Antil case (supra), shall pass an order strictly in compliance of the directions given in the aforesaid judgment by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in letter and spirit, particularly complying with the order dated 21.3.2023 of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid matter.

¶17

The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶18

Order Date :- 29.5.2023

¶19

safi

¶20

Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Durg Vijay Chauhan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Durg Vijay Chauhan v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Mohd. Navi Vs State of U.P.

Amit Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sunny Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Mamta Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Hazik @ Hazik Siddiqui Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kanhaiya Yadav Vs State of U.P.