Disposed

Chaman Kashyap Thru. Guardian His Father Sri Govind Prasad v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Dec 2024ABAIL/2095/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court granted interim protection in a criminal miscellaneous application for anticipatory bail filed by a minor. Considering the applicant's age and prima facie likelihood of false implication, the court allowed release on bond and sureties subject to specific reporting conditions.

What did the court decide?

Interim protection granted: release on personal bond and two sureties subject to cooperation, report within twenty days, and permission for leaving India.

Chaman Kashyap Thru. Guardian His Father Sri Govind… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 14

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2095 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Chaman Kashyap Thru. Guardian His Father Sri Govind Prasad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Desh Raj Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶5

The present application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. No.0053 of 2024 under Section 304, 34 IPC, Police Station Kurebhar, District Sultanpur.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶7

Issue notice to respondent no.2.

¶8

Steps be taken within one week.

¶9

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 28.3.2024 at about 11.00 p.m. the driver of the car no.UP32AV4295 while driving rashly and negligently hit the brother of the informant from behind due to which he died.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is minor. On the date of incident also he was minor. His date of birth as per the mark-sheet is 1.1.2010. He was sitting in the car. He has no complicity in the incident. It is submitted that co-accused was driving the car. The applicant has been falsely implicated.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the

¶12

applicant shall cooperate in the investigation.

¶13

Learned Addl. Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that in support of the prosecution case the statement of the three witnesses from toll plaza has been taken under Section 161 Cr.P.C., who has supported the prosecution story, however, he could not dispute the mark-sheet filed by the applicant. He prays for two weeks' time to file Counter Affidavit.

¶14

Perused the record.

¶15

On due consideration to the age of the applicant prima facie it appears that he may have been falsely implicated as also considering the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant interim protection to the applicant.

¶16

Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned.

¶17

The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witnesses. The accused-applicant shall report to the concerned police station/investigating officer within twenty days from today and will remain present as and when the arresting officer /I.O./ S.H.O. concerned call (s) for investigation/interrogation. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.

¶18

In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection.

¶19

List on 3.10.2024.

¶20

In the meantime, learned A.G.A. shall file objections/counter affidavit.

¶21

Order Date :- 11.9.2024 Madhu

¶22

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Chaman Kashyap Thru. Guardian His Father Sri Govind Prasad v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chaman Kashyap Thru. Guardian His Father Sri Govind Prasad v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ismail @ Nanga Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Ajeet Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Annuexe Bhawan Lko

Santosh Gupta @ Santosh Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Vishal @ Shalu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Balodhar vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Anita Devi and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another