Allowed

Dhananjay Bind v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Sept 2019BAIL/35562/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail application, the Single Judge allowed bail for the applicant in case Crime No.71/2019 under Section 394 I.P.C. The court imposed a personal bond and sureties, directed expedition of investigation within three months, and set conditions to prevent evidence tampering and ensure availability for interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed with bond of Rs. 25,000 plus two sureties; investigation to be concluded within three months; specific conditions regarding interrogation and travel restricted.

Dhananjay Bind Vs State of U.P. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35562 of 2019 Applicant :- Dhananjay Bind Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Shish Ram,Kalp Dev Mishra,Pradeep Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.

¶4

Supplementary affidavit field today is taken on record.

¶5

The lawyers are on strike, however, the applicant Dhananjay Bind is personally present before this Court in the present Anticipatory bail application.

¶6

I have perused the FIR as well as the order by means of which the anticipatory bail application moved on behalf of the applicants has been rejected.

¶7

It has been contended by the counsel for the applicant that the anticipatory bail application No.21 of 2019 filed on behalf of the present applicant before the court below has been rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Ghazipur, vide order dated 08.08.2019. Further contention is that the applicant was not named in the present FIR and his name cropped up in the statement of the co-accused. He further contented that the recovery if any has been made from the possession of the co-accused and there is no recovery from the applicant. The applicant has been implicated in the present case solely on account of village partibandi. The applicant has got no previous criminal history. It has been further contended that matter needs a deeper and fairer investigation before any arrest should be given effect to. The applicant has no criminal antecedent to his credit. Therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶8

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

¶9

Keeping in view the reasons as stated above, the facts and circumstances of the case as have been discussed at the Bar of this Court, 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.

¶10

In the event of arrest of the applicant, Dhananjay Bind involved in Case Crime No.71 of 2019, under Section 394, I.P.C., Police Station Shadiabad, District Ghazipur, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court 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:-

¶11

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

¶12

(ii) 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 office;

¶13

(iii) 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.

¶14

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶15

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order independently without being prejudice by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶16

The applicant is directed to produce a certified copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

¶17

In view of aforesaid, the application for anticipatory bail is, accordingly, allowed.

¶18

Let a copy of the order be issued to the learned counsel/parties concerned today itself on payment of usual charges.

¶19

Order Date :- 5.9.2019/VKG

Dhananjay Bind v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhananjay Bind v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harsh Jaiswal Vs State of Up

Harendra Kumar Masih Another Vs State of U.P.

Vijay Khan and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pankaj and Another Vs State of Up

Ramji Prasad Vs State of U.P. and 4 Ors.

Saurabh Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Anr.