Allowed

Pushpendra and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC14 Sept 2023ABAIL/9553/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge order allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by two accused persons under IPC and PPDPA. Granting bail on grounds of parity with a co-accused and lack of criminal history, the High Court released them subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicants are released forthwith on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:177849

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9553 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Pushpendra And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Rana Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

No one is present on behalf of the applicants to press the present anticipatory bail application. Learned A.G.A. is present.

¶8

The lawyers are abstaining from work today. This Court has itself perused the material available on record.

¶9

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case Crime No. 416 of 2023, registered under Sections 147, 323, 332, 353, 504, 506, 34 I.P.C. and Section 2/3 Prevention of Public Property Damages Act at Police Station- Tronica City, District- Ghaziabad with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.

¶10

A bare perusal of the instant anticipatory bail application indicates that the case of the applicants is at par with coaccused person Vijay Kumar, who has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 25.8.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.9700 of 2023.

¶11

The prayer for anticipatory bail has been vehemently opposed by Sri Deepak Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by him and the fact that there is no criminal history of the applicants.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned A.G.A., the evidence on record, pending trial and in light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgement passed by the Apex Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation,

¶13

MANU/SCOR/22410/2021, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶14

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the accused-applicants- Pushpendra and Rinku Dedha @ Narendra be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶15

(i). that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶16

(ii). that 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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶17

(iii). that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶18

(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶19

(v). that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶20

(vi). that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶21

(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶22

It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.

¶23

Order Date :- 14.9.2023 Vikas

¶24

[Krishan Pahal, J.]

¶25

Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pushpendra and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pushpendra and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Neha Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Syyed Moazzam Ali Vs State of U.P. and Another

Akhilesh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mohammad Danish and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.

Abhay Porwal @ Anshu Vs State of U.P.

Kamal Singh Sirohi Vs State of U.P.