The court granted anticipatory bail to Tirath Prasad in a case involving theft and ayacit under various IPC and mining laws, applying guidelines from Sushila Aggarwal. Standard conditions including cooperation with police and surrender of passport were imposed.
Anticipatory bail granted on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties each.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4321 of 2022
Applicant :- Tirath Prasad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Narayan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 40 of 2022, under sections 379, 411 I.P.C. and Section 4/21 Mines and Minerals Act and Section 3 The Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, Police Station Bhartkoop, DistrictChitrakoot, during the pendency of investigation.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that applicant was having valid documents i.e. transit pass (eForm-C) and after loading the Ballast (Gitti) in the Dumper truck, in the way he was suffering from loose motion and vomiting, therefore, he was admitted in the hospital. His Dumper truck was standing near the petrol pump at Bharatkoop and it was taken away by the police to the police station with allegation of short of papers. He next submitted that valid transit pass (eForm-C) was available with him, but due to admission in hospital, same could not be shown to the police. This fact may be verified from the transit pass dated 15.04.2022, which is also annexed as Annexure-3 to the afÏdavit filed alongwith anticipatory bail application. Applicant has no criminal history.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the said facts.
Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicant, he is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98 . The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant Tirath Prasad involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50, 000/- with two
sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
(1) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating OfÏcer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating OfÏcer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation;
(2) 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 ofÏcer; and
(3) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
(4) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(5) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant.
(6) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)2020 SCC Online SC 98.
(7) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against his in accordance with law.
In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating OfÏcer/ first informantcomplainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 30.5.2022 Rmk.
Digitally signed by RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA Date: 2022.05.30 16:11:19 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail during the pendency of investigation in cases under sections 379, 411 IPC, the Mines and Minerals Act, and the Prevention of Damage to Public Pro
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)Followed¶9
Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi) - 2020 SCC Online SC 98 · Who else cites this
Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)Referred¶17
Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC Online SC 98 · Who else cites this
4 provisions across 4 enactments
Tirath Prasad
State of U.P.
Neeraj Tiwari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
