Allowed

Deepak Maurya v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Feb 2023ABAIL/832/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge Court allowed anticipatory bail to the applicant in a case involving offences under Sections 395, 412 IPC. The court held that a case for bail is made out despite the applicant's apprehension of arrest, subject to specified conditions including cooperation with investigation and restrictions on leaving India.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted until submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., with conditions requiring availability for interrogation and restrictions on inducing witnesses or leaving Ind

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

¶1

Court No. - 92

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 832 of 2023 Applicant :- Deepak Maurya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.

¶4

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

¶5

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 368 of 2022, under Sections 395, 412 I.P.C., Police Station Fafamau, District Allahabad with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶6

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant is not named in the first information report and the first information report was lodged against the unknown persons. The applicant is student of intermediate and he was never involved in the offence alleged in the first information report. The applicant has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the abovementioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and that no coercive process has been issued against the applicant so far. It is submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during investigation. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶7

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

¶8

It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694 , it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

¶9

In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law

¶10

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 on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶11

The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶12

Let the applicant Deepak Maurya shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., on furnishing a personal bond 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 :-

¶13

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶14

(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 any police officer;

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 10.2.2023 sailesh

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SAILESH PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Deepak Maurya v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Maurya 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

Queen of Apostles Society St.Marys Convent Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Indramani Singh Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Shashi Kapoor Gupta Vs State of U P and 9 Others

Ajay Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Deena Gurjan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Yudhisthir @ Bablu Vs State of U.P.