Abhishek @ Chotu vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:77865

Court No. - 86

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16114 of 2025

Applicant :- Abhishek @ Chotu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Aon Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the F.I.R. was lodged against two accused persons including the applicant and two unknown persons with the allegation that they fired gunshot upon two persons. Learned counsel further submits that both the injured in their statements had specifically stated that on the exhortation made by the applicant one another co-accused Swatantra Singh had caused gun shot injuries to them. Thus, it has been argued that main role of causing gun shot injuries is assigned to the co-accused, Swatantra Singh and only that has been assigned to the applicant is of exhortation. As to the criminal history there are four cases against the applicant in which he is on bail. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that the applicant is in jail since 21.03.2025.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence.

¶9

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence and without expressing any

¶10

opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant- Abhishek @ Chotu , be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 68 of 2024, under Sections 323, 307 I.P.C., Police Station- Colonelganj, District- Prayagraj, on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶12

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶13

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

¶14

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

¶15

iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.

¶16

v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant in accordance with law.

¶18

Order Date :- 13.5.2025 Mustaqeem.

¶19

Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Abhishek @ Chotu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek @ Chotu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sudhir @ Totala vs State of U.P.

Parmatma Prasad vs State of U.P. and Another

Asif vs State of U.P.

Usman vs State of U.P.

Pawan Kumar vs State of U.P.

Manjeet Kumar vs State of U.P.