Allowed

Sanjiv v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Dec 2023ABAIL/13093/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants anticipatory bail to Sanjiv, the applicant, in a criminal case involving assault. Relying on parity with a co-accused who was previously granted bail and noting the settlement of the dispute, the court allowed the application without an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed on the ground of parity, with the order to be read subject to conditions including personal bond and cooperation in trial.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:231897

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13093 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Sanjiv Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Kant Dubey,Santosh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Krishna Kant Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shakil Ahmad, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶8

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.111 of 2023 registered under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 307 IPC at Police StationHafizpur, District Hapur with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been assigned the role of having carrying a spade (kasla) and had assaulted the injured person with it. Learned counsel has further stated that the matter has been settled as is evident from annexure no.2 to the affidavit filed with the anticipatory bail application. The case of accident has been converted into the case of assault as in true sense, it was the tractor that had turned turtle. There is no possibility of conviction in the present case.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the role of the applicant is identical to the co-accused person Arun Kumar who has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 17.08.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.8869 of 2023. Therefore, the present applicant is also entitled for anticipatory bail on the ground of parity. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he will cooperate in the trial failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.

¶11

The prayer for anticipatory bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by him.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and in light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgement passed by the Apex Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶13

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Sanjiv be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

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

¶15

(ii). that 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;

¶16

(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶17

(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶18

(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶19

(vi). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶20

(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶21

It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.

¶22

Order Date :- 07.12.2023 Ravi Kant

¶23

(Krishan Pahal, J.)

¶24

Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sanjiv v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjiv 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

Shabeena and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Vs State of U.P.

Atul Kumar Jain Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sandeep Kumar Tripathi Vs State of U.P.

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

Amit Vs State of U.P. and Another