Disposed

Chitnesh Singh and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Dept. Lko.

Allahabad HC12 Jan 2024ABAIL/69/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicants apprehending arrest in a dowry-related death case sought anticipatory bail, citing identically placed co-accused already granted interim anticipatory bail. Court issued notice to informant and granted interim anticipatory bail till next listing date.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail granted till next date of listing (30.01.2024) or surrender within 10 days, on personal bond and two sureties each.

Chitnesh Singh and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:4026

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 69 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Chitnesh Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Dept. Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Nagendra Singh,Kuldeep Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter including upto date case diary of the case and the charge sheet has already been submitted.

¶8

Heard Shri Nagendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶9

The present anticipatory bail application has been moved by the accused/applicants- Chitnesh Singh and Vipnesh Singh in Case Crime No. 0111/2017, under Sections 498-A/ 304-B I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Sareni, District- Raebareli, with the prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail as they are apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.

¶10

Learned counsel for the accused-applicants while pressing the bail application submits that it is a case of false implication. It appears to be an admitted case that the deceased had himself consumed poison and had also given it to her husband and two minor children, however, the husband and the children survived and she died..

¶11

It is vehemently submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that it is on this score and after considering all the facts and circumstances of a writ petition bearing Misc. Bench No.- 13069 of 2017 filed by the applicants and other co-accused person, protection from arrest was granted to them till submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. and thereafter, on the basis of insufficient evidence, the charge sheet has been submitted. However, the applicants have cooperated in the investigation and it is on this score, no necessity arises of their arrest.

¶12

It is further submitted that the applicants are the Jeth/ Devar

¶13

(brothers-in-law) of the deceased and identically placed coaccused persons, namely, Smt. Indra Singh and Smt. Saloni, who are the mother-in-law and Nanad of the deceased, have been granted interim anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.12.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.-3068 of 2023.

¶14

It is also submitted that that since the charge sheet has been submitted without making arrest of the applicants, it would result in great hardships to the applicants if they will be detained in prison during consideration of their regular bail application and they are apprehending arrest, not by the Investigating Agency, but by the Court. In this regard, the law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and others : (2021) 10 SCC 773, Aman Preet Singh Vs. C.B.I. through Director : 2021 SCC Online SC 941, Siddharth v. State of UP : 2021 SCC OnLine SC 615 and Mahdoom Bava Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, arising of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.376 of 2023, has been relied on. It is also submitted that the applicants are law abiding citizens and there is no apprehension that after being granted facility of anticipatory bail, they may flee from the course of law or otherwise misuse the liberty and they undertake that they will cooperate in the investigation.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. on the other hand opposes the prayer of the anticipatory bail application of the applicants on the ground that the applicants are accused of committing an heinous offence, therefore, they are not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail.

¶16

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it appears to be an admitted situation that the instant applicants are the Jeth and Devar of the deceased, who had died after consuming of some poisonous substance. Various papers, available on record, have been relied by learned counsel for the applicants in order to show that it was the deceased, who had given poison to her husband as well as two minor children, however, fortunately, the husband and minor children survived and she died and also that during the course of investigation, their liberty was protected by order of the Division Bench. Identically placed co-accused persons, namely, Smt. Indra Singh and Smt. Saloni (mother-in-law and Nanad of the deceased) have been granted anticipatory bail. Thus, without discussing merit and demerit of the case solely on the ground that identically placed co-accused persons have been granted interim anticipatory bail (protection) for a short time, the same protection may be granted to the instant applicants.

¶17

10. Thus, matter requires consideration.

¶18

Issue notice to the informant of the instant case, namely, Smt. Sanju Singh W/o Shri Akhilesh Pratap Singh, R/o Trisundi, Peeparpur, District- Amethi returnable within two weeks from today.

¶19

Steps in this regard be taken by learned counsel for the applicants within two working days from today.

¶20

List this case on 30.01.2024 in the first ten cases of the cause list along with record of Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. NO.3068 of 2023.

¶21

It is provided that till the next date of listing in the event of arrest of the applicants- Chitnesh Singh and Vipnesh Singh, in the above-mentioned case under any process of the trial court or on his appearance/surrender before the trial court within 10 days from today, whichever is earlier, they shall be released forthwith on interim anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/ Investigating Officer subject to the following conditions:-

¶22

(1) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation or even for discovery of any fact by a police officer as and when required, in case of further investigation.

¶23

(2) The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶24

(3) The applicant shall not leave the country concerned without the previous permission of the Court.

¶25

Applicant shall remain present before the trial court as and when his presence would be required and he would not take adjournment especially when the prosecution witnesses would be in attendance.

¶26

If in the opinion of the trial court default of any of the condition placed above is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and shall proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶27

It is clarified that all the observations contained in this order

¶28

are only for disposal of this anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial proceedings in any manner. Order Date :- 12.1.2024 Gurpreet Singh

¶29

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

Chitnesh Singh and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Dept. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chitnesh Singh and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Dept. Lko.

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

Kailash Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.

Rajendra Gupta Third Bail Vs State of U.P.

Babu Ram Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Aditya Maurya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and Others

Kalichand Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Others

Mohd. Taufeeq Alias Guddu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.