Allowed

Deepak v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC17 Apr 2023ABAIL/1163/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to Deepak in a matrimonial criminal case. The Court held it was a fit case for bail pending investigation, noting the dispute's civil nature and lack of credible evidence against the applicant, subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted pending filing of charge sheet on furnishing of personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties and specified conditions.

Deepak Vs State of U.P. and Another — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 84

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1163 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Deepak Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Aditya Prasad Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ram Sanehi Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.

¶6

This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant - Deepak seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.360 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 354, 506, 307, 313, 376, 511 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kankarkhera, District Meerut.

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is the brother-in-law (jeth) of the victim. The matter relates to matrimonial dispute. Allegation against the applicant is that he had attempted to outrage the modesty of the victim, but it was not probable, as the victim and the present applicant both are living in a family of so many persons. There is no injury report on record. Investigation into the matter is going on. It is further submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. He has no criminal antecedents. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶9

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

¶10

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.

¶11

In the facts and circumstances of the case and also keeping in view the fact that civil litigation between the parties regarding the said dispute is pending 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 applicant 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 applicant till filing of charge sheet in the matter.

¶12

The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶13

In the event of arrest of the applicant, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

¶15

(ii) 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/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office.

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

¶17

In case of default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of interim protection granted to the applicant.

¶18

Order Date :- 17.4.2023 ss

¶19

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

Deepak v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak 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

Subham Kashyap Vs State of U.P.

Jagdish Prasad and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dau Dayal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohammad Asif Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Brijpal Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.