Anticipatory bail application rejected for applicant facing sexual offense charges. Court noted non-compliance with previous surrender order and cited Aporex Court precedents on bail principles.
Prayer for anticipatory bail refused; application rejected.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:210807
Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11196 of 2023
Applicant :- Suresh Chandra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Saurabh Shahi,Anurag Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dharm Singh Parmar
Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.
complaint is a counter blast of the aforesaid criminal case filed on behalf of the accused side. It is further submitted that there is no independent witness of the incident and all the witnesses are the pocket persons of the complainant. It is further submitted that it is a case of malicious prosecution and the applicant is having no criminal history. It is further submitted that the complaint has been filed about 18 days after the incident without any plausible explanation of inordinate delay. It is further submitted that no actual sexual intercourse has taken place in this matter. Applicant is ready and willing to cooperate with the trial court and as such he is entitled for anticipatory bail.
It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can,
depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial.
It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.
It is further directed that the learned court concerned, while considering the bail application of the applicant in the light of Satender Kumar Antil case (supra), shall pass an order strictly in compliance of the directions given in the aforesaid judgment by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in letter and spirit, particularly complying with the order dated 21.3.2023 of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid matter.
Order Date :- 31.10.2023
ss
Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case involving serious sexual offences?
Whether the applicant has complied with prior directions of the High Court regarding surrender?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satender Kumar AntilReferred¶11
Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825 · Who else cites this
Sushila AggarwalApplied¶7
Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Suresh Chandra
Nalin Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
