Allahabad High Court
Chandra Prakash Yadav @ Kallu vs State Of U.P. And Another on 14 October, 2020
Author: Vivek Kumar Singh
Bench: Vivek Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 76 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29410 of 2020 Applicant :- Chandra Prakash Yadav @ Kallu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mahendra Pratap,Anurag Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manvendra Nath Singh Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for the complainant is taken on record.
Rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is also taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Manvendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned AGA -I, appearing for the State and perused the material brought on record.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that co-accused namely Praven Kumar Viswakarma @ Laloo has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 18.9.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.27417 of 2020, a copy of said order has been annexed as annexure-RA-1 to the rejoinder affidavit and the case of the applicant stands on identical footings. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has 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. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 30.7.2020. It has been pointed out that the applicant has no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer.
Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let applicant- Chandra Prakash Yadav @ Kallu, be released on bail in Case Crime No.110 of 2020, under Sections- 354-B, 504, 506 I.P.C. and & Section 67 I.T. Act & 7/8 The Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station- Ali Nagar, District- Chandauli, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
1. The applicant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.
2. He will not tamper with the witnesses.
3. He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad. The concerned Court shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court, Allahabad.
Order Date :- 14.10.2020 Dev/-