Allowed

Anuj Vashishth and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Apr 2023ABAIL/1143/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. was allowed by the Allahabad High Court for the applicants in a matrimonial dispute involving Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC. The court held it to be a fit case for bail till the end of the trial.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till the end of trial on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties each.

Anuj Vashishth and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 84

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1143 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Anuj Vashishth And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anjani Kumar Shahwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today alongwith certified copy of the F.I.R. is taken on record.

¶6

Criminal Misc. Exemption Application No.1 of 2022 is allowed.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶8

This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by applicants - Anuj Vashishth, Gaurav Vashishth, Shivam Vashishth and Anoop Sharma in connection with Case Crime No.157 of 2021, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Jawan, District Aligarh.

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have no concern with the present matter. They have not committed any offence. They have been falsely implicated in this case. Allegations levelled against the applicants are false. It is further submitted that after investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted in the matter under sections 323, 504, 506 IPC. It was mentioned in the charge-sheet that offence under section 452 IPC is not made out hence it is deleted. However, applicant was summoned under section 452 IPC also. No specific role has been assigned to any of the applicants. General allegation has been made and simple injuries are found on the person of the injured. If the applicants are enlarged on bail, they will not misuse the liberty and will cooperate with the investigation. The applicants have apprehension of their arrest by the police any time.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer.

¶11

In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the

¶12

controversy finally by holding the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.

¶13

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.

¶14

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.

¶15

In the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that it seems to be a matrimonial dispute as well as considering the settled principles 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 of the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicants till end of the trial in the matter.

¶16

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶17

In the event of arrest of the applicants in the aforesaid case crime, they shall be released on anticipatory bail till the end of the trial 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 :-

¶18

(i) The applicants shall make himself available before the court concerned on the date fixed in the matter;

¶19

(ii) 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 him / her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶20

(iii) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous

¶21

permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

¶22

In case of default of any of the conditions, same may be a ground for cancellation of protection granted to the applicants.

¶23

Order Date :- 19.4.2023 ss

¶24

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anuj Vashishth and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anuj Vashishth and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Smt Santosh Alias Santaresh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Ramkali and Another Vs State of U.P.

Mannu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinita Yadav @ Seema Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Muslim Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jumma Vs State of U.P. and Another