Allowed

Suraj Prasad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC7 Jun 2024/1300/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application under CrPC 438 for a petitioner accused of impersonation in a public examination. The petitioner lacked criminal history, and co-accused were already on bail. The bail was granted subject to standard conditions regarding appearance and precluding witness tampering.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two reliable sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding interrogation and witness protection.

Suraj Prasad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:42732

¶2

Court No. - 2

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1300 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Suraj Prasad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kr. Chaudhary Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No.45 of 2024 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Section 4/10 of U.P. Public Examination Act, 1998 relating to P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Balrampur.

¶8

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is the case of the prosecution that the applicant was apprehended from the examination centre i.e. Balika Inter College Tehdi Bazaar, Balrampur and alleged to have appeared in a public examination in place of the other named co-accused Rajan.

¶9

It is further submitted that even the alleged recovery which has been shown is concocted as there has been no independent witness, apart from the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶10

It has also been submitted that the co-accused namely Nitish Kumar and Rajan Kumar have already been enlarged on bail by means of the order dated 27.04.2024 and 01.05.2024 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.4505 of 2024 and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.4720 of 2024 respectively. Copies of the said orders have been placed on record as Annexure No.6 cumulatively.

¶11

Learned AGA, on the basis of material in the case diary available with him, has opposed the aforesaid the anticipatory bail, however, could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶12

Having considered the submissions and considering the facts and circumstances including the nature and gravity of the accusation, the antecedents of the applicant including that he has no criminal history and no apprehension has been expressed that the applicant is at flight risk, hence, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant can be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶13

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Suraj Prasad involved in the aforesaid FIR/Case Crime Number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court Concerned, with the conditions:-

¶14

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

¶15

(b) that 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;

¶16

¶17

(d) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶18

(e) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶20

It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶21

Order Date :- 7.6.2024 Rakesh/-

¶22

Digitally signed by :- RAKESH PRAJAPAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Suraj Prasad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Prasad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rakesh Singh Chandel vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Institutional Finance Deptt. Lko and 5 Others

Ram Kumar vs Deputy Director of Consolidation Kheri and 4 Others

Smt. Gulab Kali Vs Directorate of Enforcement Lko. Zonal Office Lko.

Shyamanand Chaubey @ S.N. Chaubey vs the State of U.P. Thru. Superintendent of Police Central Bureau Investigation/Acb Lko.

Akhilesh Kumar Verma @ Akhilesh Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Suraj Prasad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another