Partly allowed

Triloki and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC1 Mar 2021ABAIL/1642/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court rejected outright anticipatory bail due to lack of exceptional grounds. However, granted conditional relief directing applicants to surrender within 60 days for bail consideration based on cited precedents, warning of coercive action for default.

What did the court decide?

Applicants directed to surrender within 60 days for bail consideration; no coercive action till then.

Triloki and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1642 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Triloki And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashwani Kumar Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants, Triloki and Ranjeet, with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 820 of 2019, under Sections- 323, 325, 308, 504 I.P.C., Police Station- Khorabar, District- Gorakhpur, during pendency of trial.

¶7

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.

¶8

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 60 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 260 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).

¶9

Till then, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.

¶10

However, in case, the applicants does not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶11

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.

¶12

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of .

¶13

Order Date :- 1.3.2021 Rohit

Triloki and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Triloki and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Ram Saran Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dharmendra and 3 Othrers Vs State of U.P.

Mamta Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahul Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Tikam Chand Jaisawal Vs State of U.P.

Ramesh Chandra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others