Allowed

Monu @ Rahul Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC30 Nov 2022ABAIL/11676/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. filed by Monu @ Rahul Kumar in an IPC 363 case. The order was granted based on parity with a co-accused and reliance on a Supreme Court Constitution Bench judgment.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed with a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding interrogation, evidence tampering, and court appearance.

Monu @ Rahul Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11676 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Monu @ Rahul Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Vikram Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vibhav Anand 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 F.I.R. No. 140 of 2021, under Section 363 I.P.C. at Police Station- Hapur Nagar, District Hapur, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the case of the applicant is on a better footing than that of the co-accused person, Gaurav, who has already been granted anticipatory bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 1.11.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 10529 of 2022. Therefore, the present applicant is also entitled for anticipatory bail. Learned counsel has further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal history. In case the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, he will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.

¶8

The prayer for anticipatory bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspects of parity to the co-accused and of no criminal history of the applicant have not been disputed by him.

¶9

On due consideration to the arguments advance 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, as an interim measure, is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail on the ground of parity and in view of the Constitution Bench 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.

¶10

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the

¶11

applicant is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶12

In the event of arrest, let the accused-applicant Monu @ Rahul Kumar be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned/Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶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 in case charge-sheet is submitted 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 bail.

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 30.11.2022 Shalini

¶22

Digitally signed by SHALINI JAISWAL Date: 2022.12.01 11:44:24 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Monu @ Rahul Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Monu @ Rahul Kumar 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

Smt Kalyani@ Kalpana Vs State of U.P. and Another

Virendra Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramji Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Ramjiyavan Modanval and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rajesh Vs State of U.P.

Man Singh @ Mahendra Pal Vs State of U.P. and Another