Allowed

Sanket Srivastava @ Aahil v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 May 2022ABAIL/1836/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. allowed for applicant accused of affray, marnal assault, threats, molestation, and criminal intimidation. Court held false implication and lack of complicity established.

What did the court decide?

Enlarged on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 469 of 2020 till conclusion of trial on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two sureties each of like amount.

Sanket Srivastava @ Aahil Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 72

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1836 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sanket Srivastava @ Aahil Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant Sanket Srivastava @ Aahil under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 469 of 2020, for offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 323, 386, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station- Jhunsi, DistrictPrayagraj, till the conclusion of the trial, after rejecting the anticipatory bail application of the applicant by Special Judge (E.C. Act), Allahabad vide order dated 31.01.2022.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The name of the applicant surfaced on the basis of confessional statement of named co-accused Alok Vikram Singh. It is further submitted that as per the statement of the first informant, there is no whisper about the complicity of the applicant in the aforesaid crime. It is further submitted that the applicant resides in his ancestral house which is situated in front of the place of the incident and the first informant is well known about the applicant and there is no dispute between the applicant and first informant at the time of incident or prior to the incident. It is further submitted that after hearing the noise he went to the office of the first informant and he saw that named co-accused Alok Vikram Singh along-with 6-7 other persons quarrel with the first informant and beaten him. Applicant has tried to stop the quarreling and separate the persons by which co-accused Alok Vikram Singh has annoyed with the applicant and when he has been arrested then in malafide and arbitrary manner in his confessional statement made allegations against the applicant.

¶8

It is further submitted that the applicant is no more required for custodial interrogation. The applicant has no criminal history

¶9

and he has not undergone any imprisonment after conviction by any court of law in relation to any cognizable offence previously. It is further contended that the applicant is ready to participate in the investigation. The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by this Court on 19.4.2022.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant, but could not point out anything adverse against the applicant.

¶11

It is settled position of law that the anticipatory bail being an extraordinary privilege should be granted only in exceptional cases. Parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offence are required to be satisfied, where the Court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has falsely roped in the crime and would not misuse his liberty.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98, ground for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.

¶13

In case of arrest, the applicant, Sanket Srivastava @ Aahil is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in above case crime number till the conclusion of trial, on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two sureties each of like amount before the Station House Officer of Police Station/Court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required, if investigation is in progress;

¶15

(ii) 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 such person from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned/Court concerned;

¶17

(iv) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant along-with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked ;

¶18

(v) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶19

The Investigating Officer will continue with the investigation, if it is in progress and will not be affected by this order.

¶20

A copy of this order shall also be produced before the S.P/S.S.P concerned by the applicants, within a week, if the investigation is still in progress, who shall ensure compliance of this order.

¶21

With the aforesaid directions, the present Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed.

¶22

Order Date :- 11.5.2022 T. Sinha

¶23

Digitally signed by TRIPTI SINHA Date: 2022.05.13 17:30:25 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sanket Srivastava @ Aahil v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanket Srivastava @ Aahil 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

Tekai Singh @ Bhuependra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ashwani Kumar Vs State of U.P through Secretary Home and 3 Others

Anamika Ganguli Rastogi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajan Chaudhary @ Monu Vs State of U.P and Another

Ashok Kumar Patel Vs State of U.P.

Vikash Tiwari Vs State of U.P.