Allowed

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

Allahabad HC1 Dec 2022ABAIL/12052/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by Veer Singh @ Beerbahadur Singh under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case involving possession of P.D.S. rice. The court relied on Sushila Aggarwal and granted bail on conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed upon execution of personal bond with two sureties complying with specified conditions.

Veer Singh @ Beerbahadur Singh Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12052 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Veer Singh @ Beerbahadur Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Laxmi Narayan Rathour 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 application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 191 of 2022, under Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act, 1955, Police Station-Kuthaund, DistrictJalaun, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶7

As per prosecution story, one mini truck (V.X.) without any number plate fixed on it, was recovered by the police on 4.10.2022 and the rice belonging to the P.D.S. was recovered from the said mini truck laden in jute and plastic bags.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. Learned counsel has stated that applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. The applicant is neither the proprietor of the fair price shop nor he is the owner of the said truck. He does not run any business except that he is a journalist and he has been implicated owing to his endeavour against some officials. There is no criminal history of the applicant. It is further stated that applicant is co-operating in the investigation and is ready to cooperate in future also. There is no likelihood of the applicant repeating the said offence, if any. 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.

¶9

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

¶10

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 applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

¶11

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed . In the event of arrest, let the accusedapplicant Veer Singh @ Beerbahadur Singh be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on bail on furnishing a personal bond with 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:-

¶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 in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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.

¶20

Order Date :- 1.12.2022 Shalini

¶21

Digitally signed by SHALINI JAISWAL Date: 2022.12.02 13:15:08 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Veer Singh @ Beerbahadur 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

Mahendra @ Mahendra Rathor Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjay Kumar Srivastava and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Anis Husain Khan @ Anis Hasan Kahn and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Jaiprakash Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vijay Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

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