Disposed

Vivek v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Apr 2023ABAIL/691/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the High Court directed the lower court to decide the bail plea strictly following Supreme Court guidelines in Satender Kumar Antil without passing any final order on the instant petition.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed; lower court directed to decide bail application in compliance with Supreme Court guidelines.

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

¶1

Court No. - 84

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 691 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Vivek Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjive Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajeet Kumar Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA and perused the material available on record.

¶6

Present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant - Vivek in Case Crime No. 106 of 2021 (Case No. 23416/2022) under Sections 308, 323, 324, 325, 504 I.P.C., Police Station- Hajratpur, DistrictBudaun.

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has no concern with the present matter. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. It is further submitted that charge-sheet has been submitted in the matter. Applicant's case is squarely covered under Section 438 Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that if the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest any time.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer.

¶9

I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record carefully.

¶10

In this matter, as is evident from the record, offences levelled against the applicant are of Sections 308, 323, 324, 325, 504 IPC, which are punishable with the imprisonment upto seven years. The applicant has accorded his co-operation in the investigation. 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, 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.

¶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 not a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till the end of the trial.

¶14

However, it is observed that the bail application of the applicant, if moved, shall be considered and decided by the Court concerned in terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825 .

¶15

It is further directed that the Court concerned while considering the bail application of the applicant in the light of Satender Kumar Antil case (supra), shall pass an order strictly in compliance of the directions given in the aforesaid judgement by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in letter and spirit, particularly complying with the order dated 21.3.2023 of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid matter.

¶16

The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶17

Order Date :- 4.4.2023//Fhd

¶18

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

Vivek v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vivek 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

Udayveer Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Praveen Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shobha Devi and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tahir Vs State of U.P.

Banshi and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anjesh Kumar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another