Allowed

Guddu @ Naushad and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Nov 2022ABAIL/8080/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single bench allowed an anticipatory bail application for three applicants in a theft and intimidation case by relying on parity with co-accused and pre-empting future contingencies as per the Supreme Court judgment in Sushila Aggarwal.

What did the court decide?

Allow Ante Bail with Rs. 50,000 personal bond and two sureties each for release from custody pending investigation.

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

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8080 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Guddu @ Naushad And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sudarshan Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Prashant Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Vibhav Anand Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶6

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case Crime No.88 of 2013 registered under Sections 380, 448, 352, 504, 506 and 143 IPC at Police Station- Cantt, District Varanasi with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that coaccused persons, Rehana Begum and Rushi @ Mohiba, have already been granted anticipatory bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 27.9.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.8051 of 2022. Therefore, the present applicants are also entitled for anticipatory bail on the ground of parity. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicants. Learned counsel for the applicants undertake that they will cooperate in the trial failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.

¶8

The prayer for anticipatory bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by him.

¶9

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the fact that the co-accused persons have already been enlarged on anticipatory bail, the applicants are liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1" . The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶10

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the accused-applicants- Guddu @ Naushad, Gulzar and Gudiya @ Shabana be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶11

that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶12

that 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;

¶13

that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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.

¶19

Order Date :- 2.11.2022 Ravi Kant

¶20

Digitally signed by RAVI KANT Date: 2022.11.02 17:16:09 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Guddu @ Naushad and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guddu @ Naushad 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

Harendra @ Harvindra and 2 Others Vs State of U.P and Another

Kamini Chaudhary Vs State of U.P.

Nekhram Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Jai Shri Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rampal Singh Vs State of U.P.

Radheyshyam and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.