Allowed

Chanchal Mishra Alias Ratnesh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC31 Oct 2023BAIL/43287/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order granted bail to the applicant accused of offences including murder and trespass. The court relied on the lack of physical injury, the co-accused receiving anticipatory bail, no criminal record, and the inability of the State to show tampering risk.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with two sureties and conditions not to tamper with evidence or witnesses and to appear in court.

Chanchal Mishra Alias Ratnesh Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:207735

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43287 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Chanchal Mishra Alias Ratnesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vishnu Dutt Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 274 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 307, 286, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C., Police Station- Jhunsi, District- Prayagraj during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case owing to certain other dispute between the parties. In the alleged incident no person has received any injury. It is further contended that identically placed coaccused Sarvesh Mishra @ Nayan has been granted anticipatory bail by this court vide order dated 17.8.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 8701 of 2023. The applicant claims parity. The applicant does not have any criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 2.7.2023. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶10

Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that no person has received any injury in the alleged incident. The co-accused Sarvesh Mishra @ Nayan has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Further the applicant has presently remained confined for more than three months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Let the applicant, Chanchal Mishra Alias Ratnesh involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that:

¶12

i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶13

ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness;

¶14

iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶16

Order Date :- 31.10.2023 S.S.

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Chanchal Mishra Alias Ratnesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chanchal Mishra Alias Ratnesh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nikki @ Bagga Vs State of U.P.

Sunita Devi Vs State of U.P.

Salman Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Vs State of U.P.

Shivendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Devendra Tiwari @ Rajan Tiwari Vs State of U.P.