Allowed

Ranjana Pandey v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Sept 2023ABAIL/13471/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court confirmed and made absolute an interim anticipatory bail application, extending the bail till the conclusion of the trial based on the Supreme Court's ruling in Sushila Aggarwal v. State and the fact that no incriminating material was found against the applicant.

What did the court decide?

The interim order granting anticipatory bail dated 28.3.2023 was confirmed and made absolute till the end of the trial.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:183395

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13471 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Ranjana Pandey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Lalit Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA and perused the entire record.

¶7

Earlier by the order dated 28.3.2023 the accused applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by this Court. After investigation charge sheet has already been filed in the matter. The applicant has cooperated during that period and has not misused the said liberty. No custodial interrogation is required. It is also brought to the notice of the Court by way of rejoinder affidavit that in compliance of the aforesaid order and further order dated 25.7.2023, a demand draft of Rs. 9000/- has been deposited before the Court concerned and a copy of the same has been annexed with the rejoinder affidavit.

¶8

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.

¶9

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.

¶10

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

¶11

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.

¶12

Since no incriminating material has come against the applicant in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State, therefore, considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and also the nature of accusation made against the applicant, the anticipatory bail application is allowed and the order dated 28.3.2023 granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant is confirmed and made absolute till end of the trial, on the terms and conditions as mentioned in the said order dated 28.3.2023.

¶13

Order Date :- 21.9.2023 safi

¶14

Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ranjana Pandey v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjana Pandey 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

Mohammad Mohsin Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Aqil and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nitin Singh Alias Trivendar Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajay Garg Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Firoz Vs State of U.P.

Raj Kumar Sahu Vs State of U.P. and Another