Allowed

Veerabhadram Vislavath and 3 Others v. State of U.P.and 2 Others

Allahabad HC20 Nov 2020ABAIL/5978/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Coram of Siddharth, J., allowed a Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for the applicants facing multiple charges including Section 498-A IPC. Relied upon Supreme Court directions in Sushila Aggarwal to grant bail with strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicants enlarged on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties and complying with conditions including passport surrender and presence in court.

Veerabhadram Vislavath and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.and… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5978 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Veerabhadram Vislavath And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mamta Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Yogendra Misra

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State.

¶6

Order on Criminal Misc. Exemption Application

¶7

This exemption application is allowed.

¶8

Order on Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application

¶9

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants, Veerabhadram Vislavath, Chavli Devi, Ravnath Vishlavath Aka Ram and Dr. Prasad Rao , with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 0504 of 2018, under Section- 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 307 and 392 IPC, Police Station- Sasni, District- Aligarh, during pendency of trial.

¶10

Counsel for the applicant has submitted that in compliance of the order dated 13.10.2020 of this court, the applicant has deposited Rs. 13,50,000/- regarding the arrears of the amount of maintenance of the opposite party no. 2.

¶11

Learned counsel for the informant has not disputed the aforesaid fact as submitted by the counsel for the applicant.

¶12

From the perusal of the record it appears that the interim protection was granted to applicant nos. 2, 3 and 4 by the order dated 06.10.2020 by this court. The applicant no. 1 was not given any benefit of the aforesaid order.

¶13

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicants.

¶14

In view of the fact that the applicant has proved his bonafide by the complying the order darted 13.10.2020, he is entitled to relief.

¶15

Hence the applicants are directed to be enlarged on anticipatory

¶16

bail without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and his antecedents as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98 and order dated 22.05.2020 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.2609 of 2020 . The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶17

Let the applicants involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶18

The applicants shall not leave India during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶19

The applicants shall surrender their passport, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. Their passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.

¶20

That 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶21

The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicants.

¶22

In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail, the trial Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98 .

¶23

The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against them in accordance with law.

¶24

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order

¶25

downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶26

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶27

Order Date :- 20.11.2020 Rohit

Veerabhadram Vislavath and 3 Others v. State of U.P.and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Veerabhadram Vislavath and 3 Others v. State of U.P.and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sachida Nand Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Virendra Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.

Phool Chandra and 10 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Avinash Bhatt Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Mohd. Taiyab Vs State of U.P.

Vishal Saini Vs State of U.P. and Another