Allowed

Sompal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Nov 2023ABAIL/11382/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the Allahabad High Court allowed the application for Sompal facing charges of assault on police and attempted murder. The court relied on Sushila Aggarwal v. State and emphasized the need to investigate allegations of false implication.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till conclusion of trial on personal bond with two sureties and compliance with specified conditions regarding appearance and tampering.

Sompal Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:221741

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11382 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Sompal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Chandra Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.

¶7

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 114 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 353, 336, 427 IPC, Police Station Sarsawan, District Saharanpur, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶8

As per prosecution story, the police party had gone to the place on the complaint made by a villager against other persons and the applicant alongwith other 13 named persons are stated to have fired at the police party and assaulted them by bricks etc. on 18.4.2019.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive and has the apprehension of his arrest. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. Learned counsel has next stated that the applicant is not named in the original complaint filed by the villager. The role of firing has been assigned to co-accused person Vinay S/o Chandra Pal, although no person has sustained any firearm injuries. The two injured persons have sustained simple injury.

¶10

Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, he will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.

¶11

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of " Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98 ", the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.

¶13

Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶14

In the event of arrest of the applicant, Sompal involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-

¶15

i. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶16

ii. that 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 officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶17

iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;

¶18

iv. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; v. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶19

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

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶21

It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶22

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶23

Order Date :- 22.11.2023 Shalini

¶24

Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sompal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sompal 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

Asha Ram Vs State of U.P.

Mahmood Alam @ Guddu Vs State of U.P.

Ranjeet Lona Vs State of U.P.

Vishal@ Mogala Vs State of U.P.

Azim @ Azimuddin Vs State of U.P.

Naveen Vs State of U.P. and Another