Allowed

Gaurav Sharma v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC5 Dec 2022ABAIL/10084/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allows an anticipatory bail application filed by an applicant accused of multiple offences under the U.P. Excise Act and IPC. Granting bail was based on the principle of parity with a co-accused and the applicant's lack of prior criminal history.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties subject to specific conditions.

Gaurav Sharma Vs State of U.P.and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10084 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Gaurav Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Indra Mani Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Indra Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Aditya Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶6

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 100 of 2021, under Sections 62/72 of U.P. Excise Act, 1910, Sections 272, 273, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120B IPC, Police Station Nawabganj, District Bareilly, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶7

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant has claimed parity with the co-accused Kamal Kishore Sharma, who has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No.9965 of 2022 vide order dated 21.10.2022. Since the case of the applicant is at par with the co-accused who has already been granted anticipatory bail, the applicant is also entitled for the same on the ground of parity. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed and the applicant has cooperated in the investigation. The applicant has no criminal history.

¶8

The prayer for anticipatory bail has been vehemently opposed by learned AGA. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused and also the fact of no criminal history assigned to the applicant, has not been disputed by him.

¶9

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of " Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98 ", the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.

¶10

Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is

¶11

allowed.

¶12

In the event of arrest of the applicant, Gaurav Sharma involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-

¶13

that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶14

that the applicant 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶15

that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶16

that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶17

that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶18

that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the anticipatory bail of the applicant.

¶20

It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶21

Order Date :- 5.12.2022 Siddhant

¶22

Digitally signed by SIDDHANT SAHU Date: 2022.12.05 18:09:27 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Gaurav Sharma v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gaurav Sharma 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

Veer Singh @ Beerbahadur Singh Vs State of U.P.

Suryaprakash Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Abhishek Yadav Vs State of U.P and 3 Others

Sandeep Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Guljar and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sachin Verma @ Sachin Singh Vs State of U.P.