Ankit Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:140755

Court No. - 73

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1869 of 2023

Applicant :- Ankit Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Udai Bhan Singh,Udai Bhan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

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

¶7

This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by applicant- Ankit Kumar in connection with Case Crime No. 102 of 2018, under section 366 IPC, P.S. Fatehpur, District Saharanpur.

¶8

F.I.R. alleged that minor sister of the informant was missing since in the night of 25.05.2018. F.I.R. was lodged on 26.05.2018 under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C. and during the course of investigation, the victim was recovered and her statements were recorded.

¶9

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. Charge sheet in the matter has been submitted. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶10

It is further submitted that accused applicant has no concern with the alleged offence. It is next submitted that due to the village rivalry, he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that medical report does not support the prosecution version as the victim of the case refused for her medical examination. It is next submitted that although in the F.I.R, it was alleged that the victim was a minor girl but during investigation, she was found to be major. It is next submitted that the essential ingredients under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C. are not established in this case. It is also submitted that during the course of

¶11

investigation, the present applicant was granted interim protection till filing of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.16848 of 2018 vide order dated 23.08.2018. It is next submitted that after filing of the charge sheet, no process under Sections 82 & 83 Cr.P.C. has been issued against the applicant and he has not been declared as proclaimed offender by the court.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and vehemently submitted that in her statements under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C., the victim of the case has specifically named the present accused applicant as the main accused in this case. It is further submitted that after collecting the ample evidence, charge sheet has been submitted in this matter.

¶13

Prima facie, it appears that no motive for kidnapping has been assigned to the accused applicant as it is stated by the prosecutrix in her both the statements under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. During the course of investigation, he has been cooperative with the I.O. of the case. It also appears from the perusal of the record that interim anticipatory bail was granted to the accused applicant by this Court vide order dated 07.04.2023 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 Cr.P.C. No.1869 of 2023 but the same has not been misused by the present accused applicant.

¶14

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.

¶15

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.

¶16

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, llikelihood 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.

¶17

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

¶18

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 conclusion of trial in the matter.

¶19

The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶20

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

¶21

(i) 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.

¶22

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶23

(iii) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶24

(iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶25

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail of the applicant in accordance with law.

¶26

Order Date :- 14.7.2023 Shivangi

¶27

Digitally signed by :- SHIVANGI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ankit Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankit Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arman Mehandi Vs State of U.P.

Sanjeev Kumar Pathak and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohammad Iqbal Khan Vs State of U.P.

Veer Singh @ Jai Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vijay Kumar Yadav and 5 Others Vs State of U.P.

Sheela and Another Vs State of U.P.