SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Vijay Singh vs State Of U.P. And Another on 21 October, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 51

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 34829 of 2019

Applicant :- Vijay Singh

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Saumitra Dwivedi,Shivam Shukla,Vinay Saran(Senior Adv.)

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

Hon’ble Vipin Sinha,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Yogeshwar Rai, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It has been further contended that applicant happens to be father-in-law; there is matrimonial dispute between the husband and wife and entire family members have been implicated in the case; the husband is not a party in the present case. The matter needs deeper and fairer investigation before any arrest should be given effect to. Therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the nature of accusation and the fact that he has no criminal antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

In the event of arrest of the applicant, Vijay Singh involved in Case Crime No. 399 of 2019, under Section 323, Section307, Section376, Section511, Section498A, Section507 I.P.C. and 3/4 SectionDowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Sikandra, District Agra, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) the applicant will join and participate in each and every aspect of “Investigation” and will lend full assistance to the Investigating Agency even with regard to “discovery of fact” if and when required so by the Investigating Agency or the concerned court;

(ii) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

iii) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iv) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/Investigating Officer/first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

Order Date :- 21.10.2019

Ujjawal

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation