Allowed

Himanshu Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC9 Aug 2023ABAIL/2736/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. regarding an FIR forAttempt to murder and other offences, the court applied Sushila Aggarwal. Considering the delay in filing the FIR and the completion of the charge sheet, the court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant upon furnishing a personal bond and specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till the conclusion of trial upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties and complying with specific conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:160503

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2736 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Himanshu Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

The pleadings have been exchanged between the parties today in Court. Heard Sri Krishna Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri V.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.

¶7

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 593 of 2022, under Sections 307, 386, 504 IPC, Police Station Baradari, District Bareilly, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶8

As per prosecution story, the applicant and other co-accused persons are stated to have assaulted the son of the informant on 8.3.2022 at about 8.00 pm. The co-accused person Saurabh is stated to have fired at him thereby causing injury to him, who was taken to the Medicity Hospital by the applicant and other coaccused persons, where he was admitted and was treated.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive and has the apprehension of his arrest. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. Learned counsel has next stated that the applicant has not been assigned the role of firing. The allegations are per se false, which is indicative from the fact that it was the applicant and the other co-accused persons, who had rushed him for treatment to hospital. It is next stated that had the applicant committed the said offence, he would not dare to take him to hospital. Learned counsel has next stated that the FIR is delayed by about three months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.

¶10

Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against

¶11

him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. The final report (charge sheet) has been submitted. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, he will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.

¶12

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on the ground that the present FIR was instituted by moving an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and the same was moved on 20.4.2022 itself and the application to S.S.P. was moved on 8.4.2022. Thus, the said delay in lodging the FIR has been explained.

¶13

In rebuttal, learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the said application sent to S.S.P. is itself delayed by one month and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.

¶14

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, and the fact of delay in moving the application to the S.S.P. concerned and in lodging the FIR, and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of " Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98 ", the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.

¶15

Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶16

In the event of arrest of the applicant, Himanshu Gupta involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-

¶17

i. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶18

ii. that 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;

¶19

iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;

¶20

iv. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶21

v. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶22

vi. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶23

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶24

It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶25

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶26

Order Date :- 9.8.2023 Shalini

¶27

Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Himanshu Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Himanshu Gupta 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

Chandu @ Chand Mohd Vs State of U.P.

Aman Chauhan@ Aman Rana Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajay Vs State of U.P. and Another

Faiyyaz Vs State of U.P.

Mohd Jafar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Jyoti Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others