Allowed

Rampal Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Nov 2022ABAIL/10235/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court, Court No. 78, granted anticipatory bail to the applicant. Relying on Supreme Court guidelines, the court allowed the application subject to conditions regarding interrogation, appearance, and maintaining contact with witnesses, requiring a personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release of Rampal Singh on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties each of like amount, subject to specific conditions.

Rampal Singh Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10235 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rampal Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Raj Pandey,Shubham Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ram Raj Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Smt. Ladli Pandey, 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.066 of 2021, registered under Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act at Police Station- Aurangabad, District Bulandshahar with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶7

Earlier on, the applicant was not granted the anticipatory bail on the ground that there was nothing on record to suggest that any serious effort has been made to arrest the applicant by the police. Learned counsel has further stated that now the chargesheet has been filed and there is every possibility that the coercive measures will be taken against the applicant. Learned counsel has further stated that already the licence of the said fair price shop has been cancelled. Learned counsel has further stated that the witnesses mentioned in the FIR have already deposed in his favour despite the said fact, the charge-sheet has been filed. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory

¶10

bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1" . The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶11

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Rampal Singh be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶12

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

¶13

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;

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶18

It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial or deciding the regular bail application.

¶19

Order Date :- 2.11.2022 Ravi Kant

¶20

Digitally signed by RAVI KANT Date: 2022.11.02 17:13:19 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rampal Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rampal Singh 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

Harendra @ Harvindra and 2 Others Vs State of U.P and Another

Kamini Chaudhary Vs State of U.P.

Nekhram Vs State of U.P.

Guddu @ Naushad and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Jai Shri Vs State of U.P. and Another

Radheyshyam and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.