Allowed

Monu @ Deepak and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Dec 2021ABAIL/16747/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of an anticipatory bail application filed by Monu @ Deepak and Suresh accused in a case of disturbing peace and assaulting woman. Finding the case involves no injury and no criminal antecedents, the court granted bail on personal bond conditioned on surrender, non-interference, and passport deposit.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on anticipatory bail till submission of police report on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each subject to conditions of surrender, non-interference, and p

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

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 16747 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Monu @ Deepak And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ashish Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri B.B. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants Monu @ Deepak and Suresh, seeking anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest in Case Crime No. 503 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 354, 427 IPC, Police Station Muradnagar/Bapudham, District Ghaziabad.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants argued that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the allegations in First Information Report are totally false and concocted. There was some dispute between the first informant and co-accused Akash after which the First Information Report has been lodged on the basis of an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. It is argued that the case is a case of no injury as is evident from the medical examination report, copy of which is annexed as annexure 8 of the alleged injured Sanny who has not been received any injury. The applicants have no criminal history as stated in para 29 of the affidavit in support of the anticipatory bail application.

¶8

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and argued that the applicants are named in the First Information Report and there are allegations them.

¶9

After having heard the counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the present case is a case of no injury. As many as five accused persons including the applicants and one unknown person have been named as accused in the First Information Report lodged on the basis of an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.

¶10

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,

¶11

considering the nature of accusation and the fact that they have no criminal antecedents, the applicants are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

¶12

In the event of arrest of the applicants, namely Monu @ Deepak and Suresh involved in Case Crime No. 503 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 354, 427 IPC, Police Station Muradnagar/Bapudham, District Ghaziabad, they 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 their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- 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:-

¶13

(i) the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police office as and when required;

¶14

(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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office;

¶15

(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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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 a 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.

¶18

The applicants are directed to produce a 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.

¶19

The anticipatory bail application is disposed of.

¶20

Order Date :- 4.12.2021 M. ARIF

¶21

(Samit Gopal, J.)

Monu @ Deepak and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Monu @ Deepak and Another 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

Raj Kumar@ Har Prasad Vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Singh @ Jahir Baba Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Munish and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pramod Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mewa Ram Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rakesh Vs State of U.P.