Remanded

Sonu Alias Sachin v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Mar 2021ABAIL/3446/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge heard an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. citing Supreme Court precedents but found the charge sheet made out offences. The court directed the applicant to surrender within 30 days before the lower court for bail, with a warning of coercive action for non-compliance.

What did the court decide?

The applicant shall surrender before the court below within 30 days and apply for bail, and no coercive action shall be taken in the interim.

Sonu Alias Sachin Vs State of U.P. — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3446 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Sonu Alias Sachin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- C.D.Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Sonu Alias Sachin, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 443 of 2016, under Sections- 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station- Sadar Bazar, District- Saharanpur, during pendency of trial.

¶7

Applicant has approached this Court after submission of charge sheet against him relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98 and judgment of this Court in the case of Adil Vs. State of U.P., Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S No.438 Cr.P.C. No. 8285 of 2020. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that from the material collected by the Investigating Officer, no offence is made out against the applicant, hence he is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial.

¶8

After considering the material collected by the Investigating officer in support of charge sheet, this Court finds that the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant is not correct. The material collected by the Investigating Officer makes out the offences regarding which the applicant has been charge sheeted.

¶9

However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and on the request of learned counsel for the applicant, it is directed that the applicant will appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail.

¶10

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

¶11

However, in case, the applicant does not appears before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.

¶12

It is made clear that the applicant will not be granted any further time by this court for surrendering before the court below as directed above.

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 12.3.2021 KS

Sonu Alias Sachin v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu Alias Sachin 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kunwar Krishna Agrawal Vs State of U.P.

Geeta Singh and Another Vs State of U.P.

Tara Chandra Vs State of U.P.

Shamshad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ranno Devi Vs State of U.P.

Gulshan Vs State of U.P. and Another