Dismissed

Balwant Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Allahabad HC21 Nov 2024/2438/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court dismissed an anticipatory bail application filed by Balwant Singh in a criminal case involving offenses under sections 147, 148, 149, 504, and 307 of the IPC. The court held that the applicant played a primary role in firing and that any compromise deed had no legal effect at this stage.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail under section 438 Cr.P.C. dismissed.

Balwant Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:76989

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2438 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Balwant Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Apoorv Dev,Avnish Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today by counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Sri Anurag Kumar Singh, advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2 and the same is taken on record.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anurag Kumar Singh, counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶9

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 206 of 2024, under sections 147, 148, 149, 504 and 307 of IPC P.S.- Imaliya Sultanpur District- Sitapur.

¶10

The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the applicant and the complainant have entered into a compromise deed and it has also been stated by the injured that he could not identify that who has opened fire. He also submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is cooperating with the investigation proceedings. He submits that applicant will always cooperate with the investigation as well as the trial proceeding and there is apprehension that police will arrest him and as such, he may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶11

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the complainant has opposed the submissions aforesaid and submits that the main role of opening fire is assigned to the present applicant and the injured has received injures of fire arm which is evident from the injury report, thus, submission is that the applicant is not entitled for any relief.

¶12

Considering the submissions of counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the main role of opening fire is assigned to present applicant and there are fire arm injuries over the body of the injured. So far as any compromise, entered into the parties is concerned, the same has no implication over the present matter and the same cannot be considered at this stage.

¶13

Considering the complicity of the accused and the gravity of offence, this Court do not find any good ground to intervene in this matter.

¶14

Consequently, the instant anticipatory bail application is hereby dismissed.

¶15

Consigned to records.

¶16

Order Date :- 21.11.2024 Mayank

¶17

Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Balwant Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balwant Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Amit Chand Yadav Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko.

Kamla Maghar Vs Union of India Thru. Intelligence Officer Officer Pankaj Dubey,N.C.B.,Lko.

Sonam Chisti @ Sonam Kinnar and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Ranjeet Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lucknow

Maiku Lal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.