Allowed

Sunil v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Oct 2023ABAIL/11706/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application by Sunil in connection with a criminal case involving unspecified sections of the IPC. The applicant, who was summoned to face trial, sought bail apprehending arrest. The Court noted that a co-accused had already been granted bail and held that custodial interrogation was not required. Citing Supreme Court precedent, it granted bail

What did the court decide?

The application is allowed; the accused shall be released on personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties on undertaking not to tamper with evidence or flee.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:204677

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11706 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Sunil Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Sinha,Samarth Sinha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

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

¶7

This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by applicant- Sunil in connection with Case Crime No. 310 of 2017, under sections 147, 352, 323, 504, 427, 506, 325, 308 IPC, P.S. Mubarakpur, District Azamgarh.

¶8

It is alleged in the F.I.R. that with an allegation for inflicting injuries upon three injured persons from the informant side by the named accused persons. An F.I.R. was lodged on 22.07.2017 which culminated into charge sheet except named accused persons, Anil and Sunil during course of trial. The present applicant along with other co-accused, Anil was summoned to face trial under Sections 147, 323, 352, 504, 427, 506, 325, 308 I.P.C. by the court concerned vide order dated 10.11.2022.

¶9

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that 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. Charge sheet in the matter has been submitted. It is further submitted that during the course of investigation, the I.O. found absolutely no evidence against the present applicant but false depositions, they are represented before the court during the course of trial by the prosecution witnesses. It is next submitted that identically placed co-accused, Anil was also summoned to face trial on the application filed under Section 319 Cr.P.C., who has already been granted anticipatory bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.10.2023 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 11380 of 2023. It is next submitted that the applicant has been cooperative

¶10

throughout the investigation and he is having no criminal history to his credit and as such, he is entitled for anticipatory bail. It is also submitted that after submission of the charge sheet, he is entitled for anticipatory bail. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail application. However, he could not dispute this factual aspect that the identically placed co-accused person has already been granted anticipatory bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court as submitted by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

In the present case, the present applicant has been summoned to face trial under Section 319 Cr.P.C. and identically placed coaccused, Anil has been granted anticipatory bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court. Now no custodial interrogation is required from the present applicant.

¶13

Although the charge sheet has been submitted in this matter, but in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1 , the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the controversy finally by holding the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.

¶14

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.

¶15

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, llikelihood 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.

¶16

Hence, 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 conclusion of trial in the matter.

¶17

9. The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶18

In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, 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 the Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶19

(i) 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.

¶20

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶21

(iii) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶22

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

¶23

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail of the applicant in accordance with law.

¶24

Order Date :- 27.10.2023 Shivangi

¶25

Digitally signed by :- SHIVANGI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sunil v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil 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

Brijesh Kumar Shahi @ Brijesh Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suraj Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vipin Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mohd. Javed Vs State of U.P. and Another

Budhia Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Suresh Kumar @ Sonu Vs State of U.P. and Another