Allowed

Chintu @ Mukesh Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC20 Jul 2023ABAIL/5957/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted anticipatory bail to Chintu @ Mukesh Singh in a case alleging offences under Sections 498A and 306 IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The court allowed the application on the ground of parity with co-accused already granted bail, noting the death appeared suicidal, without expressing a final opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted until the conclusion of trial upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties and adhering to specified conditions.

Chintu @ Mukesh Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:144896

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5957 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Chintu @ Mukesh Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant Chintu @ Mukesh Singh in Case Crime No. 1139 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 306 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kalyanpur, District Kanpur Nagar, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶8

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has the apprehension of his arrest and has claimed parity with the co-accused Arvind Singh & Smt. Reena Singh, who have already been granted anticipatory bail by another Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. Nos. 3051 of 2023 & 5956 of 2023 vide orders dated 13.4.2023 & 03.07.2023. Since the case of the applicant is at par with the co-accused who have already been granted anticipatory bail, the applicant is also entitled for the same on the ground of parity.

¶9

The prayer for anticipatory bail has been vehemently opposed by learned AGA. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by him.

¶10

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.

¶11

In the this matter, it appears that the applicant is the brotherin-law (dewar) of the deceased. No specific role has been assigned to him in the commission of the alleged crime. There is no suicide note of the deceasedand in the post mortem report, it appears that the cause of death has been found suicidal hanging.

¶12

Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶13

In the event of arrest of the applicant, Chintu @ Mukesh Singh involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-

¶14

i. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶15

ii. that 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 or tamper with the evidence;

¶16

iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶17

iv. that in case, the charge-sheet is submitted, the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶18

v. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶19

vi. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the anticipatory bail of the applicant.

¶21

It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶22

Order Date :- 20.7.2023 Shivangi

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SHIVANGI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Chintu @ Mukesh Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chintu @ Mukesh Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Jaswant Singh Vs State of U.P.

Harchand Singh and Another Vs State of U.P.

Mohammad Taki Vs State of U.P. and Another

Lalit Vs State of U.P. and Another

Amar@ Rauki Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sanjay Pandey Vs State of U.P.