Allowed

Ankit Pachauri v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC28 Nov 2022ABAIL/11937/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by Ankit Pachauri in a case registered under 498-A and other sections of the IPC alleging dowry harassment. The court granted bail subject to standard conditions including availability for interrogation and non-interference with witnesses, relying on the Supreme Court judgment in Sushila Aggarwal.

What did the court decide?

Released forthwith on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal and two sureties each on specified conditions.

Ankit Pachauri Vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11937 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ankit Pachauri Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Dubey, 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.42 of 2022, registered under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 IPC at Police StationKotwali Orai, District Jalaun with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶7

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have married the informant on 18.06.2021 as per Hindu Rites and is stated to have subjected her to cruelty for a demand of dowry as well as some ornaments including Rs.2,00,000/- cash and other things.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Being the husband, the applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. The proceedings with respect to the other co-accused persons have been stayed by this Court vide order dated 10.10.2022 passed in Application U/S 482 No.28674 of 2022. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicant. 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.

¶9

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.

¶10

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and

¶11

considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory 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.

¶12

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Ankit Pachauri be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal 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:-

¶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

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 or deciding the regular bail application.

¶21

Order Date :- 28.11.2022 Ravi Kant

¶22

Digitally signed by RAVI KANT Date: 2022.11.28 17:23:09 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ankit Pachauri v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankit Pachauri 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

Prashant Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Dilshad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahul Shukla Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bhagwan Singh Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Indra Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Sunita Vs State of U.P. and Another