Allowed

Haresh Kumar Kushwah v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC17 Jul 2023ABAIL/12278/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted anticipatory bail to Haresh Kumar Kushwah in a criminal trial involving multiple Sections of the IPC. The court held it was a fit case for bail pending the filing of the police report, subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Granted anticipatory bail till filing of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. on bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties.

Haresh Kumar Kushwah Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:141797

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12278 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Haresh Kumar Kushwah Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

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

¶7

This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant - Haresh Kumar Kushwah seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.633 of 2021, under Sections 384, 511, 448, 504, 420, 467, 471 IPC, Police Station Tajganj, District Agra0.0

¶8

The brief description of the facts of this case is that the interim protection by way of interim anticipatory bail was granted to the applicant by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 30.01.2023, which was being extended from time to time.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. He has been falsely implicated in this matter. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. Investigation is going on into the matter. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that despite several visits to the Investigating Officer, he did not proceed to record the statement of the applicant so far. No specific allegations have been made against him in the F.I.R. It is further submitted that no actual money has been paid by the informant nor

¶10

the alleged threatening was made by all the accused persons to him. It is also submitted that dispute between the parties is purely of civil nature. He has no criminal history to his credit. No custodial interrogation is required in the matter. In case the 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.

¶12

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 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.

¶13

In Siddharth Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, (2022) 1 Supreme Court Cases 676 , the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that personal liberty is an important aspect of our constitutional mandate. The occasion to arrest an accused during investigation arises when custodial investigation becomes necessary or it is a heinous crime or where there is a possibility of influencing the witnesses or accused may abscond. Merely because an arrest can be made because it is lawful does not mandate that arrest must be made. A distinction must be made between the existence of the power to arrest and the justification for exercise of it. If arrest is

¶14

made routine, it can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self-esteem of a person. If the Investigating Officer has no reason to believe that the accused will abscond or disobey summons and has, in fact, throughout cooperated with the investigation, then there is no compulsion on the officer to arrest the accused.

¶15

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 the filing of police report under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court.

¶16

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶17

In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till the filing of police report under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court 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:-

¶18

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

¶19

(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.

¶20

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

¶21

permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶22

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.

¶23

Order Date :- 17.7.2023

¶24

Raj

¶25

Digitally signed by :- RAJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Haresh Kumar Kushwah v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Haresh Kumar Kushwah 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

Veer Singh @ Jai Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vijay Kumar Yadav and 5 Others Vs State of U.P.

Ankit Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Jhamman Vs State of U.P.

Dharmendra Vs State of U.P. and Another

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