Allowed

Prem Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Nov 2023ABAIL/12127/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by four individuals in a criminal case alleging assault and attempted murder. The court relied on Apex Court jurisprudence to grant bail subject to specific conditions, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the allegations.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each, subject to specific conditions.

Prem Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:222429

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12127 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Prem Singh And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Ashish Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed today by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Ram Ashish Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants and Ms. Ifra Islam, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material available on record.

¶8

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Special Complaint Case No.945 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 452, 506 of IPC, Police Station Ekdil, District Etawah, with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.

¶9

As per prosecution story, the complaint case was filed by the complainant against the applicants and other co-accused persons of having assaulted the complainant and her husband with the weapons they were carrying in their hands on 14.04.2022 at about 06:00 PM.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that they are maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive and have apprehension of their arrest. They have nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. Learned counsel has further stated that the complaint case has been filed after a delay of 20 days. The CT Scan of the injured person Sridevi was conducted on 23.04.2022 i.e. 9 days after the incident and it is mentioned in it that she had sustained injuries six days before. All the allegations are fake as the applicant has not been assigned the role of assault.

¶11

Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicants to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against them. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicants have also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that the applicants have criminal history except one case assigned to the applicant no.3 which has been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed today. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed, they will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.

¶12

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 applicants and also the fact that the applicant nos. 1, 2

¶13

& 4 have no criminal history.

¶14

Considering 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 applicants are entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.

¶15

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 applicants is allowed .

¶16

In the event of arrest of the applicants, Prem Singh, Veer Singh, Amit and Guddi Devi 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:-

¶17

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

¶18

ii. that 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶19

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

¶20

iv. that the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; v. that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; vi. that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence are exempted;

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶24

Order Date :- 23.11.2023 Siddhant

¶25

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Prem Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prem Singh and 3 Others 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

Sompal Vs State of U.P.

Vishal@ Mogala Vs State of U.P.

Azim @ Azimuddin Vs State of U.P.

Bhura Alias Taseen Vs State of U.P.and 2 Others

Aamir @ Rafey Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajkumar Vs State of U.P. and Another