Allowed

Subham Kashyap v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Apr 2023ABAIL/17451/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in a cheating and criminal conspiracy case. The court relied on Supreme Court precedents regarding the duration of bail and imposed conditions, including a personal bond and sureties, releasing the applicant till the end of the trial.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till end of trial on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and compliance with specified conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 84

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 17451 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Subham Kashyap Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishe Pandey,Praveen Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the material available on record.

¶6

The present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant - Shubham Kashyap in Case Crime No.463 of 2021, under Sections 399, 402, 411 I.P.C., Police Station - Khatauli, District -Muzaffar Nagar.

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of his arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. He is not named in the F.I.R. and his name has been brought into the light on the basis of statement of co-accused persons. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. The investigation of the case has ended into charge-sheet. It is further submitted that the applicant has provided his full cooperation during the course of investigation. No criminal history has been assigned to the applicant. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶9

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.

¶10

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.

¶11

It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while

¶12

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

Hence, 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 end of the trial in the matter.

¶14

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶15

In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till end of the trial on his 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 :-

¶16

(i) The applicant shall make himself available before the court concerned on the date fixed in the matter;

¶17

(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 officer;

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

¶19

In case of default of any of the conditions, same may be a ground for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant.

¶20

Order Date :- 17.4.2023 ss

¶21

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Subham Kashyap v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subham Kashyap 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

Jagdish Prasad and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dau Dayal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shahid Vs State of U.P.

Mohammad Asif Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

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