Allowed

Narayan and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Aug 2022ABAIL/6603/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for the applicants, finding a case made out despite the gravity of the accusation, subject to compliance with several specific conditions during the trial.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties on specified conditions of appearance, non-tampering with evidence, and non-interference with witnesses.

Narayan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6603 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Narayan And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nagesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, 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. 852 of 2020, under Sections 452, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, P.S. Highway, District Mathura, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicants may be released on bail.

¶7

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have an apprehension that they may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against them. It has further been submitted that applicants have no criminal antecedents and that no coercive process has been issued against the applicants so far. According to the prosecution version, the applicants have trespassed into the house of complainant and threatened the complainant. Learned counsel submitted that in the alleged incident no one has sustained any injury. No motive of alleged incident has been shown and only general allegations have been levelled. The investigation of the case is complete and chargesheet has already been filed. It was also submitted that applicants undertake to co-operate during trial and they would appear as and when required by the Court. It has been stated that in case, applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall

¶8

not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the trial 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 principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicants 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 applicants- Narayan, Jitendra and Palendra involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶14

The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

2.The applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶16

3.The applicants shall appear before the trial court on the date

¶17

fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶18

The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.

¶19

The applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the Court below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of applicants in accordance with law.

¶21

Order Date :- 5.8.2022

¶22

A. Tripathi

¶23

Digitally signed by AKHILESH TRIPATHI Date: 2022.08.06 10:44:29 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Narayan and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narayan and 2 Others 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

Chandra Shekhar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suraj Harijan and Another Vs State of U.P. .and Another

Om Prakash @ Lallan Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Brijpal Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Anil Ahwan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others