Allowed

Sarurabh and 3 Others v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Jun 2023ABAIL/5486/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted anticipatory bail to four applicants in a criminal case involvingSections 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 313 IPC, directing compliance with standard conditions and framing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000 each with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicants enlarged on anticipatory bail by furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount subject to the stipulated conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:124569

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5486 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Sarurabh And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Srivastava,Indra Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Upendra Upadhyay

¶5

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶6

1.Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicants, is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Upendra Upadhyay, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

¶8

This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 435 of 2022, under Section 323, 504, 506, 313 I.P.C., P.S.- Souron, District- Kasganj, during the pendency of investigation.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It has further submitted that initially the FIR of the alleged incident has been lodged after two and half months of the alleged incident under sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and thereafter section 313 has been added. It has further submitted that the injured/victim did not sustained any external injury on her body. No offence is made out against the applicants. The applicants have not committed the alleged offence. False allegation has been made for the purpose of harassment.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicants. He has submitted that in view of the seriousness of the allegations made against the applicants, they are not entitled to grant of anticipatory bail. The apprehension of the applicants are not founded on any material on record. Only on the basis of imaginary fear, anticipatory bail cannot be granted.

¶11

Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case

¶12

and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicants, they are directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶13

In the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicants- Saurabh, Gaurav, Anupam and Pushpa Devi involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(1) The applicants shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation.

¶15

(2) 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

¶16

(3) The applicants shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶17

(4) The applicants shall surrender their passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. Their passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.

¶18

(5) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicants.

¶19

(6) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

¶20

(7) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If

¶21

in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against his in accordance with law.

¶22

In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.

¶23

With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands disposed of .

¶24

Order Date :- 6.6.2023/A.

¶25

Digitally signed by :- AFAQ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sarurabh and 3 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarurabh and 3 Others 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

Ujjwal Tiwari Vs State of U.P.

Bhupesh Chandra Kushwaha Vs State of U.P.

Samir Vs State of U.P.

Vikas Vs State of U.P.

Aakash Vs State of U.P.

Om Jaiswal@ Rajan Ahaluwaliya Vs State of U.P.