Bhaiya Lal Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 75

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3005 of 2022

Applicant :- Bhaiya Lal Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Singh Bais Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 0004 of 2022, under Sections 406, 504 and 506 IPC, P.S. Badagaon, District Varanasi, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶7

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. It has further been submitted that applicant has no criminal antecedents and that no coercive process has been issued against the applicant so far. The allegation of taking amount of Rs. 5 lakhs from first informant on pretext of providing job to his son, is against co-accused Jawahar Prasad Yadav, who has already been granted anticipatory bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.05.2022, passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 2998 of 2022. It was submitted that in fact applicant and co-accused are co-sharers in the disputed property. The first information report has been lodged making vague allegations. No date and time of incident has been mentioned nor any documentary evidence has been shown regarding alleged payment of Rs. 5 lakhs. It has also been submitted that in fact both the parties have arrived at

¶8

compromise, copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-4 to the instant application, but later on first informant did not obey the conditions of said compromise and the first information report was lodged making false and vague allegations. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during investigation and trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate during investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail.

¶10

It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

¶11

In the instant case, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶12

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶13

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Bhaiya Lal Yadav in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail

¶14

on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned/Court below concerned with the following conditions :-

¶15

(i) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police as and when required;

¶16

(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 him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶17

(iii) the applicant would co-operate during investigation and trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶18

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶19

Order Date :- 4.7.2022 A. Tripathi

¶20

Digitally signed by AKHILESH TRIPATHI Date: 2022.07.04 17:27:19 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Bhaiya Lal Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhaiya Lal Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raja Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satyabhan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajan Maurya and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Arun Mishra @ Arun Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Veer Gangwar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others