Allowed

Rishabh Chaudhary v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Apr 2023BAIL/10022/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application allowed. Applicant, accused in abduction/extortion FIR causing firearm injuries and implicated in pending murder/arms cases, released on personal bond and two sureties as his case parallels a co-accused already on bail.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Rishabh Chaudhary Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 88

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10022 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Rishabh Chaudhary Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Pal Singh,Jitendra Rana Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Jitendra Rana, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Tanay Kumar, learned AGA for the State.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 121 of 2022, under Sections 364-A, 34 IPC, Police Station Ecotech-I, District Gautam Buddh Nagar during pendency of the trial.

¶7

FIR of the present case was lodged on 02.10.2022 under Section 364-A IPC against unknown persons and according to the FIR minor son of the informant aged about 11 years was abducted and he received a call on his mobile that his son is with the caller and caller demanded Rs. 30 lac from the informant.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant was not named in the FIR and it is alleged that next day i.e. on 03.10.2022 father of the victim/abductee fulfilled the demand of accused persons and paid them Rs. 30 lac but immediately thereafter police arrived and two co-accused persons along with money managed to escape and co-accused Vishal S/o Bhuvanesh and applicant were apprehended and in the incident they also sustained firearm injury and on the basis of their confessional statement, applicant and above mentioned coaccused Vishal have been made accused in the present matter.

¶9

He further submits that entire allegation made against the applicant is totally false and baseless and applicant never participated in the alleged crime and no recovery was made from his possession and admittedly police arrested the applicant and co-accused Vishal after handing over the abductee to his father. He next submits that another co-accused Vishal S/o Kunwar Pal has been encountered by the police and after encounter, the entire money of Rs. 30 lac, which was given by the informant as ransom, was recovered from his possession. He further submits that neither abductee was recovered from

¶10

the possession of applicant nor ransom amount was recovered from his possession.

¶11

He next submits that co-accused Vishal S/o Bhuvanesh, who was arrested along with applicant, has been released on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.03.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2156 of 2023. He placed the bail order of co-accused Vishal during the course of argument, which is taken on record and marked as 'A'. He further submits that case of applicant is at par with co-accused Vishal and applicant is not having any previous criminal history but at the time of arrest in the present matter he was also implicated in two cases under Section 307 IPC and Arms Act and in the present matter he is in jail since 03.10.2022.

¶12

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant along with three other co-accused persons abducted the minor son of the informant for ransom and during the operation applicant and co-accused Vishal were arrested and they also sustained injury but he could not dispute the fact that neither from the of applicant or co-accused Vishal victim was recovered nor alleged ransom money was recovered from their possession and co-accused Vishal has already been released on bail.

¶13

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶14

Although, as per allegation next day from the date of abduction, on the information, police party arrived in the forest and in the encounter applicant and co-accused Vishal were arrested and both sustained firearm injury but it is alleged that two coaccused Vishal S/o Kunwar Pal and Shivam managed to escape and admittedly neither victim was recovered from the possession of applicant nor any ransom money was recovered from his possession and co-accused Vishal S/o Kunwar Pal has been encountered by the police and entire ransom money was recovered from his possession.

¶15

Further, co-accused Vishal has already been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court and case of applicant is at par with him. Further, applicant was not having any previous criminal history but when he was arrested in the present matter then he was also implicated in two cases relate to Section 307 IPC and Arms Act and in the present matter he is in jail since 03.10.2022.

¶16

Therefore, from the discussion made above, in view of this Court, it is a fit case to release the applicant on bail.

¶17

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶18

Let the applicant - Rishabh Chaudhary be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶19

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶20

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and antisocial activity.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶23

Order Date :- 3.4.2023 AK Pandey

¶24

Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rishabh Chaudhary v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rishabh Chaudhary 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashahar Alias Shebu Vs State of U.P.

Mansoor Gazi Vs State of U.P.

Parashuram Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Sachin Sahni @ Santosh Sahnai Vs State of U.P.

Aditya Verma Vs State of U.P.

Bajrul Vs State of U.P.