Allowed

Brijesh Sonkar and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC22 May 2023ABAIL/2729/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC for four applicants accused of attempted murder and assault. The bail is granted till the end of trial subject to personal bond and standard conditions, despite a pending Section 482 application.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till the end of trial subject to a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and conditions regarding availability, interference with witnesses, and travel outside India.

Brijesh Sonkar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:112567

¶2

Court No. - 84

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2729 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Brijesh Sonkar And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Prakash,Dinesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Diwakar Shukla

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

This application has been moved on behalf of the applicants Brijesh Sonkar, Pradeep Sonkar, Kuldeep Sonkar and Babloo Sonkar seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 68 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 504, 506, 307, 323 IPC, Police Station Kishanpur, District Fatehpur.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the informant as well as the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against them. Allegations levelled against the applicants are false. Injuries received by the injured are simple in nature. No gunshot injury has been received to any person. Applicants have no criminal history. After completion of investigation, charge sheet has been submitted in the matter. No process under Sections 82 and 83 CrPC has been issued against the applicants and the applicants have not been declared absconder. In case applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that application U/S 482 CrPC No.43757 of 2018 moved by the applicants is still pending before this Court.

¶10

I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

¶11

In this matter, it has been alleged in the F.I.R. that the applicants alongwith other co-accused persons made assault upon

¶12

the informant and other injured Daya Shanker Mishra with lathi and danda on 31.3.2018 at 1.15 p.m. and also made fire upon the informant with intention to kill him and fled away. F.I.R. was lodged, investigation started and now charge sheet has been submitted.

¶13

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.

¶14

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.

¶15

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.

¶16

Considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, nature of accusation, role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that though the application U/S 482 CrPC moved by the applicants is pending but at present no interim order is operative against the present applicants and also that in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 9394 of 2018 vide order dated 13.4.2018, the applicants were protected till submission of police report under Section 173(2) CrPC, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicants till the end of trial.

¶17

The application is allowed accordingly.

¶18

In the event of arrest of the applicants, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their 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:-

¶19

(i) The applicants shall make themselves available before the Court concerned on the date fixed in the matter and will cooperate in the trial.

¶20

(ii) The applicants 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 office.

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

Order Date :- 22.5.2023

¶24

safi

¶25

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

Brijesh Sonkar and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brijesh Sonkar and 3 Others 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

U.S.R.T.C. Thru Its Chairman Vs Raja Ram and Others

U.P.S.R.T.C. Thru Its Chairman Vs Sri Pal and Others

U.P.S.R.T.C. Thru Regional Managar Etawah Vs Veermati

Smt. Bhavana Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anand Kumar Gupta and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravi Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another