Allowed

Kripal and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC26 Jul 2023ABAIL/6161/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted anticipatory bail to two applicants in a case involving conversion of religion by persuasion and cheating until the conclusion of the trial, imposing standard conditions to prevent tampering with evidence, intimidating witnesses, committing similar offences, and leaving the country without permission.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed on personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and conditions against tampering, intimidating witnesses, committing similar offences, and leaving India.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:148770

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6161 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Kripal And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Gautam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

In compliance of the earlier order dated 26.05.2023 copy of the order sheets of the trial Court have been filed, which is kept on record.

¶7

It is a case of conversion to christian religion by way of persuasion and cheating.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA and perused the material available on record.

¶9

This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by applicants- 1. Kripal and 2. Koshindra in connection with Case No. 1019 of 2019 arising out of Case Crime No. 591 of 2018, under sections 295A IPC, P.S. Chandpur, District- Bijnor.

¶10

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. It is further submitted that during the course of investigation a notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. was given to the applicants by the police and during course of investigation applicants they have been cooperative. It is further submitted that now the charge sheet has been submitted. Applicants have no criminal history to their credit. In case applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶11

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

¶12

From perusal of the record it appears that during course of investigation applicants were cooperating and now after filing of charge sheet no custodial interrogation is required. The offences

¶13

levelled against the applicants are punishable with the imprisonment for a maximum period upto seven years.

¶14

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.

¶15

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.

¶16

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, llikelihood 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.

¶17

Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicants 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 applicants till conclusion of trial in the matter.

¶18

The anticipatory bail application is allowed accordingly.

¶19

In the event of arrest of the applicants in the aforesaid case crime, 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 :-

¶20

i. 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 or tamper with the evidence

¶21

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

¶22

iii.The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.

¶23

iv.The applicants shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶24

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 applicants in accordance with law.

¶25

Order Date :- 26.7.2023 Fhd

¶26

Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kripal and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kripal and Another 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

Amit Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Prashant Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pop Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bharat Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Virendra Kumar Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Vijay Kumar Vs State of U.P.