SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
SIDDHARTH
BABLOO @ RAVIKANT CHAUHAN AND 3 OTHERS – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
ABAIL/1251/2021



Court No. - 73

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL

APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1251 of 2021

Applicant :- Babloo @ Ravikant Chauhan And 3 Others

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Vishal Jaiswal

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A for

the State.

Order on Criminal Misc. Exemption Application

This exemption application is allowed.

Order on Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on

behalf of the applicants, Babloo @ Ravikant Chauhan, Dileep

Chauhan, Tiger @ Nagendra Chauhan and Bagh Singh

Chauhan, with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime

No. 247 of 2020, under Sections- 147, 148, 188, 504, 506, 427,

452 and 325 I.P.C., Police Station- Line Bazar, District-

Jaunpur, during pendency of trial.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal

of material brought on record as well as complicity of accused

and also judgement of the Apex Court in the case of P.

Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, AIR 2019

SC 4198, this Court does not finds any exceptional ground to

exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of

the case and on the request of learned counsel for the

applicants, it is directed that in case the applicants appear and

surrender before the court below within 90 days from today and

apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and

decided as per the settled law laid by this Court in the case of

Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57)

ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court

in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of

U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC).

Till then, no coercive action shall be taken against the

applicants.

However, in case, the applicants does not appear before the

court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be

taken against them.

It is made clear that the applicants will not be granted any

further time by this court for surrendering before the court

below as directed above.

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed

of.

Order Date :- 22.1.2021

Rohit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top