Allowed

Shankar Lal and 3 Others v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Dec 2022ABAIL/11931/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for the applicants in a case involving sections 323, 504, and 326 IPC. The court applied the principles laid down in Sushila Aggarwal and granted bail subject to standard conditions including appearance before the trial court and non-interference with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted to Shankar Lal, Indrapal, Vinod Kumar and Jai Prakash on personal bond with two sureties each subject to conditions.

Shankar Lal and 3 Others 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. - 11931 of 2022 Applicant :- Shankar Lal And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Verma,Swapnesh Singh

¶3

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Shiv Nath Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Akhilendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶6

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case no. 590 of 2018, under Sections 323, 504, 326 IPC, Police Station- Bahjoi, District- Sambhal, with the prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.

¶7

As per prosecution story, the applicants are stated to have assaulted the first informant on 31.7.2016 at about 4.00 pm and an NCR was registered as NCR No. 285 of 2016 the same evening at about 6.55 pm.

¶8

Learned Senior Counsel for the applicants has argued that the applicants are absolutely innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize them. Learned Senior Counsel has vehemently argued that after thorough investigation, the police was pleased to file a final report (charge sheet) under Sections 323 and 504 IPC only, as no serious allegations were found by the investigating officer after even recording the statement of the treating doctor. Learned Senior Counsel has further stated that the first informant herein had filed a complaint case regarding the same case after a span of ten months and the applicants have been put to double jeopardy and the said cases were consolidated as per the provisions of Section 210 Cr.P.C. Learned Senior Counsel has next stated that the false report has been filed with the complaint case alleging that there is some fracture in the left parietal region. It is further stated that the said injury report has been challenged by the applicant and is not substantiated by any evidence whatsoever. There is no criminal history of the applicants. The charge sheet has been filed. There is no possibility of the applicants influencing the trial or tampering with the evidence. It is further stated that applicants are co-operating in the trial and are ready to

¶9

cooperate in future also. There is no likelihood of the applicants repeating the said offence, if any. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicants to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against them. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicants have also been touched upon at length.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the fact that applicants have no criminal history and the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicants.

¶11

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by 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) 5 SCC 1" , the applicants are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

¶12

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed . In the event of arrest, let the accusedapplicants Shankar Lal, Indrapal, Vinod Kumar and Jai Prakash be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) 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 court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant;

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

that 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.

¶21

Order Date :- 12.12.2022 Shalini

¶22

Digitally signed by SHALINI JAISWAL Date: 2022.12.14 10:29:25 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shankar Lal and 3 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shankar Lal and 3 Others 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shakeel Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

M.S. Ahluwalia Vs State of U.P. and Another

M.S. Ahluwalia Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nagendra Vs State of U.P.

Karan Singh Vs State of U.P.

Mohd Aslam Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others