The Single Judge rejected a bail application filed by Anil Singh, who was charged with rape, murder, and other offences. The court held that the gravity of the offence warranted denial of bail.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 86
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2016 of 2022
Applicant :- Anil Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kamla Singh,Ritukar Gupta,Vijay Shanker Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vimal Kumar Pandey
Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.
Heard Mr. V.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Vijay Shanker Singh, Kamla Singh, Ritukar Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, Mr. Bachan Singh, holding brief of Mr. Vimal Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the informant, and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant, who is involved in Case Crime No. 95 of 2021, under Sections 376-D, 323, 506, 306 IPC, Police Station Mehnazpur, District Azamgarh, with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant is a reputed persons and runs a school namely, Sharda CBSC School,Mehnazpur, district Azamgarh, in which the deceased Chitra Singh was appointed an a teacher. Since she was creating nuisance in the school, she was removed from the school, due to which Chitra Singh was inimical to the applicant. It is also submitted that the incident is alleged to have been taken place in the intervening night of 5/6.10.2021, while the first information report has been lodged on 09.10.2021, for which no explanation has been given by the prosecution. It is next submitted that the cause of death of the deceased could not be ascertained, hence viscera was preserved. The viscera report is still awaited. It is next argued that there is no eye-witness of the alleged incident. It is next contended that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence.The applicant is languishing in jail since 10.10.2021. The applicant does not have any criminal history to his credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that Shamsher
Bahadur Singh, the husband of the deceased, witnesses Smt.Rachna Singh and Smt. Shivangi Singh, daughters-in-law of the deceased narrated the version of the FIR and the applicant was identified by the deceased at the spot on the day of occurrence by the deceased herserlf since she is the informant of the case. It is admitted that the deceased was teacher in the school of the applicant, therefore there was no doubt of identification by the deceased. It is further submitted that the first informant, who is the deceased also has specifically made allegation about committing rape upon her against the applicant and further she has mentioned the applicant brutally beaten her.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced on behalf of parties, gravity of the offence and severity of the punishment, I do not find any good ground to grant bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, the bail application is rejected.
Order Date :- 19.1.2023 Sazia
Digitally signed by :- SAZIA AQUIL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the applicant charged with offences under Sections 376-D, 323, 506, and 306 IPC.
Whether the applicant poses a flight risk or danger to public safety in a case involving alleged rape and murder.
Anil Singh
State of U.P.
Mayank Kumar Jain
Sazia Aquil
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
