The court granted anticipatory bail to applicants Prashant Tiwari and Mohd. Hashmi in a criminal bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C., imposing standard conditions despite the applicants having prior criminal cases.
Anticipatory bail granted subject to bond, surety, appearance conditions, and no inducement of witnesses.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3433 of 2020
Applicant :- Prashant Tiwari And Anr Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Adya Prasad Tewari,Brijesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajesh Kumar Pandey
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Supplementary affidavit prepared by learned counsel for the applicant has been served upon Sri Rajesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the complainant. He is directed to file the copy of the supplementary affidavit in the registry of the Court during the course of the day.
Heard Sri Brijesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Rajesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the complainant, Km. Meena, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants have five criminal antecedents to their credit out of which three cases have already been explained and two cases have been explained in the supplementary affidavit. He further submits that the applicants and the informant belong to one and the same family and there has been civil litigation going on between them and injunction order has been passed by the competent court in favour of applicant no.1 with respect to property in dispute. In one of the cases lodged by the informant being Case Crime No.127 of 2019 the applicant no.1 along with others have been granted interim bail by coordinate Bench of this Court on 22.1.2020 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.246 of 2020. The injury received by injured Siyaram Tiwari appears to be simple in nature as no internal damage was caused. The present FIR has been lodged against the applicants just to malign their image in the society.
The learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant no.1 is a criminal as against him there are six cases including a case under the Goonda Act in which notice has been issued on 29.5.2020 but could not dispute the fact that five cases have been explained by the applicant no.1 in the present application as well as in supplementary affidavit and both the applicant and informant are collaterals.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and his antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.
In the event of arrest of the applicants Prashant Tiwari and Mohd. Hashmi involved in Case Crime No.274 of 2029, u/s 147, 323, 504, 506, 352, 427, 325 and 307 IPC, P.S. Sujanganj, district Jaunpur, 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 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 applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii) the applicants 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iii) the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.
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 applicants.
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 applicants.
The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by it alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked, before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 6.7.2020 Gaurav
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicants are entitled to anticipatory bail despite having criminal antecedents.
Whether the injury in the accused case is simple in nature.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Prashant Tiwari
Mohd. Hashmi
State Of U.P.
Ramesh Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
