Allowed

Raj Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC24 Aug 2023ABAIL/2697/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application of Raj Kumar Sharma in a criminal case involving kidnapping, robbery, and injury. The applicant furnished a bond and was granted bail till the end of the trial based on the nature of the offence and lack of credible evidence.

What did the court decide?

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

Raj Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:172665

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2697 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Raj Kumar Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Satyanand Tripathi,Vimlendu Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the parties.

¶7

Despite notice, none appears for the complainant / opposite party no.2.

¶8

Present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant - Raj Kumar Sharma in S.C. No. 672 of 2022 arising out of Criminal Complaint Case No. 82 of 2019, under Sections 323, 394, 452, 504 I.P.C., Police Station - Bisauli, District- Budaun.

¶9

Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶10

Summoning order was passed against the applicant under sections 323, 394, 452, 504 I.P.C. by the court concerned on a private complaint filed by the complainant / opposite party no.2 alleging therein that about 30 to 35 accused persons came to his house, kidnapped him and also committed robbery in his house. It reveals from the perusal of the record that a number of four injuries have been caused to the complainant, which are simple in nature and a general role has been assigned to all the accused persons in the commission of the crime.

¶11

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of his arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. He has been falsely implicated into this matter. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. It is further submitted that vide order dated 2.3.2023, the applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail by this Court and he has not

¶12

misused the interim protection granted to him. It is further submitted that no prima facie case is made out against the applicant. No custodial interrogation is required from the applicant. Applicant has no criminal history. He has been cooperative with the trial court so far. There is no chance of fleeing away of the applicant.

¶13

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶14

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record.

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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 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.

¶18

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.

¶19

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶20

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

¶21

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 :-

¶22

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

¶23

(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;

¶24

(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 him before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

¶25

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

¶26

Order Date :- 24.8.2023 ss

¶27

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

Raj Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Rajkumari Vs State of U.P.

Rajul Vs State of U.P.

Sudama Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sarvendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Munish Kumar Rajpoot Vs State of U.P.

Swayam Prakash Vs State of U.P. and Another