Allowed

Sunil Vohra @ Rakesh Kumar Vohra v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC25 May 2023ABAIL/6067/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court granted anticipatory bail to Sunil Vohra in a complaint under IPC sections 147, 148, 149, 307, etc., appreciating his claim of innocence and compromise, relying on Sushila Aggarwal.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties each, subject to conditions not to tamper with evidence, intimidate witnesses, commit similar offences, or leave India without per

Sunil Vohra @ Rakesh Kumar Vohra Vs State of U.P. and 2… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:117687

¶2

Court No. - 84

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6067 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Sunil Vohra @ Rakesh Kumar Vohra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sumit Goyal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

1.Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

This anticipatory bail application has been moved by applicant- Sunil Vohra @ Rakesh Kumar Vohra (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 380 of 2003, under sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 452, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Saharanpur.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Present F.I.R. was lodged in the year 2003, after investigation final report was filed by the police on the basis of which protest filed by the informant, final report was rejected and protest was treated as complaint. During the proceedings of the case, there was compromise between both the parties which was filed before the learned court on 15.11.2019 which is still pending in which it was mentioned that injured Krishnpal Karnwal also filed an affidavit on 22.10.2013 that the accused persons did not commit the incident with him. In pursuance of process of the learned court, there is apprehension of arrest against the applicant, so request for anticipatory bail during pendency of trial. He further submitted that co-accused of the present case, Dilbag Singh @ Bagga, has already been enlarged on anticipatory bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 1487 of 2023, vide order dated 10.04.2023 and the case of present accused-applicant stands on identical footing as that of abovesaid co-accused hence, the present applicant is also entitled to the parity of anticipatory bail as stated above.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶10

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.

¶11

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.

¶12

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.

¶13

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 conclusion of trial in the matter.

¶14

The anticipatory bail application is allowed accordingly.

¶15

In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his 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 :-

¶16

i. 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.

¶17

ii. The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶18

iii.The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶19

iv. The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by her before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail of the applicant in accordance with law.

¶21

Order Date :- 25.5.2023 Nitika Sri.

¶22

Digitally signed by :- NITIKA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sunil Vohra @ Rakesh Kumar Vohra v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Vohra @ Rakesh Kumar Vohra v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Smt Anushka Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Sher @ Shera Vs State of U.P.

Rohit Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Mohit @ Moti Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohammad Israr Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raj Kumar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.and 2 Others