Shyam Sundar Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

Shyam Sundar Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail till submission of police report, if any, under section 173(2) Cr.P.C., on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer concerned, subject to conditions: (B) co-operation with the Investigating Officer and reporting as and when required; (C) no inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts; (D) not leaving India without previous permission of the Court. In default or misuse, the Public Prosecutor/Investigating Officer/first informant-complainant may apply for cancellation.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Shyam Sundar is entitled to anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 360 of 2022 under Sections 147, 148, 307, 427 of IPC and Sections 3/5/7 of U.P. Mining and Transportation Rules, Police Station Sainya, District Agra.

Court's answer

The applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail on parity with co-accused Raj Kumar, who has already been granted anticipatory bail till the submission of police report by another Bench of this Court; the State did not dispute this factual aspect of parity.

Ratio / Principle

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant deserves to be granted anticipatory bail in connection with Case Crime No. 360 of 2022.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail - granted on parity. Applicant sought pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in Case Crime No. 360 of 2022 (Sections 147, 148, 307, 427 IPC and Sections 3/5/7 of U.P. Mining and Transportation Rules), P.S. Sainya, District Agra. Co-accused Raj Kumar had already been granted anticipatory bail till submission of police report by another Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 13586 of 2022 vide order dated 21.04.2023; the parity aspect was not disputed by the State. The applicant's single prior criminal case was explained by supplementary affidavit. Bail granted on personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of the like amount, with conditions of co-operation with investigation, no inducement/threat/promise to witnesses, and no departure from India without prior permission; liberty reserved to seek cancellation in case of default or misuse. (Krishan Pahal, J.; order dated 30.5.2023; Neutral Citation 2023:AHC:121009.)

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:121009

Court No. - 83

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13599 of 2022

Applicant :- Shyam Sundar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ghanshyam Das Mishra,Hans Nath Pandey

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

Supplementary affidavit filed today by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

Heard Sri Hans Nath Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.P. Patel, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 360 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 307, 427 of IPC and Sections 3/5/7 of U.P. Mining and Transportation Rules, Police Station Sainya, District Agra, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicants have claimed parity with the co-accused Raj Kumar, who has already been granted anticipatory bail by another Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 13586 of 2022 vide order dated 21.04.2023. Since the case of the applicant is at par with the co-accused who has already been granted anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, the applicant is also entitled for the same on the ground of parity. Learned counsel has also stated that the applicant has criminal history of one case which has been explained vide supplementary affidavit filed today.

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

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant deserves to be granted anticipatory bail in connection with the aforesaid case.

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed with

following directions:-

(A) In the event of arrest of the applicant involved in aforesaid case shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on his/her furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned;

(B) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation;

(C) 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and

(D) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

Order Date :- 30.5.2023 Siddhant

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