Court granted anticipatory bail to applicants in a case registered under sections relating to assault, unnatural offence, and intimidation, till the end of the trial upon furnishing bond and sureties.
Anticipatory bail granted till end of trial on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/ with two sureties each.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:230310
Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12392 of 2023
Applicant :- Dhoop Nath And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Gunjan Sharma
Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J .
informant side against the applicants and a criminal complaint was also filed by the present applicants against the informant side which is pending. It is further submitted that due to animosity of the litigation, the applicants have been falsely roped in this case. It is further submitted that there is no independent eyewitness of the occurrence and only simple injuries have been found over the body of the injured. No sexual assault has been made upon her. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit.
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.
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.
"11. A reading of the aforesaid shows that it is the guiding principle for a Magistrate while exercising powers under Section 170CrPC which had been set out. The Magistrate or the Court empowered to take cognizance or try the accused has to accept the charge-sheet forthwith and proceed in accordance with the procedure laid down under Section 173CrPC. It has been rightly observed that in such a case the Magistrate or the Court is required to invariably issue a process of summons and not warrant of arrest. In case he seeks to exercise the discretion of issuing warrants of arrest, he is required to record the reasons as contemplated under Section 87CrPC that the accused has either been absconding or shall not obey the summons or has refused to appear despite proof of due service of summons upon him. In fact the observations in sub-para (iii) above by the High Court are in the nature of caution.
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 :-
(i) The applicants shall make themselves available before the court concerned on the date fixed in the matter;
(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;
(iii) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.
O rder Date :- 5.12.2023 Vibha
Digitally signed by :- VIBHA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicants in the said criminal case
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and anotherReferred¶13
Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1 · Who else cites this
Aman Preet Singh v. CBIReferred¶17
Aman Preet Singh v. CBI, (2022) 13 SCC 764 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Dhoop Nath And Another
Nalin Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
