Allowed

Vijendra Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Jun 2023ABAIL/5683/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail application under CrPC Sec. 438, the Allahabad High Court granted bail to the applicant facing prosecution under the Indian Medical Council Act and IPC. The court cited the preventive nature of bail and lack of criminal antecedents as key factors, imposing standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted until the conclusion of trial upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties.

Vijendra Singh Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:123793

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5683 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Vijendra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Tirpathi,Manoj Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This anticipatory bail application has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 599 of 2022, under Sections 15(2), 15(3) Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and 420 I.P.C. Police Station Thakurdwara, District Moradabad during the pendency of trial.

¶8

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that applicant has no concerned with the alleged prosecution story mentioned in the first information report. It is submitted that FIR has been lodged with delay of 14 days without there being any explanation. It is further submitted that applicant is not owner of the Om Digital Paith Lab while he was an employee in the aforesaid lab since three months and was drawing salary of Rs. 8000/- per month. It is further submitted that neither any letter pad was found in the name of the applicant nor any sign board was found in the aforesaid lab. It is also contended that in F.I.R. it is noted that at the time of inspection report papers having names of Dr. A.K. M.B.B.S., M.D. and Subhash Singh D.M.L.T. were found. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. It is submitted that charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant. It has been lastly submitted that the punishment in the aforesaid offence is below than seven years. Applicant has no criminal history to his credit and that in case, he is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶9

Per-contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail but could not dispute the aforesaid aspect of the matter.

¶10

Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties

¶11

and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, taking into consideration the gravity of the accusation as well as the fact that there being no criminal antecedents of applicant and there being no possibility of fleeing from justice and considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, judgement dated 11.7.2022 and Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)2020 SCC Online SC 98 , without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

¶12

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶13

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Vijendra Singh, involved in aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions :-

¶14

(i) the applicant shall appear before the learned trial court on each date when the case is fixed unless exempted.

¶15

(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/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶16

(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.

¶17

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶18

Order Date :- 2.6.2023 SY

¶19

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

Vijendra Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijendra Singh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashish Patel Vs State of U.P.

Munni Devi Vs State of U.P.

Aman Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Rizwan Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Sheikh Jilani Vs State of U.P.

Vikas Singh Vs State of U.P.