Arpit Agrawal and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

¶1

(Through Video Conferencing)

¶2

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:23678

¶3

Court No. - 33

¶4

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1377 of 2022 7

¶5

Applicant :- Arpit Agrawal And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Nagendra Mohan,Ajay Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶7

List has been revised.

¶8

Heard Sri Salil Mohan, Advocate holding brief of Sri Nagendra Mohan, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Avishesh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶9

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case Crime No.23 of 2020, registered under Sections 354, 354-B, 323, 506, 498-A I.P.C. at Police Station- Wazeerganj, District- Lucknow with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that coaccused person, Sumit Agarwal has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 8.4.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.4071 of 2020. The criminal history of the applicants has been explained. Therefore, the present applicants are also entitled for anticipatory bail on the ground of parity. There is no criminal history of the applicants. Learned counsel for the applicants undertake that they will cooperate in the trial failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.

¶11

The prayer for anticipatory bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by him.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, 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

¶13

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, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 coupled with the judgment of Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825, 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- Arpit Agrawal and Dinesh Kumar Agarwal @ Dinesh Agarwal be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal 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 below 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 :- 18.3.2024 Vikas/-

¶24

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶25

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

Arpit Agrawal and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arpit Agrawal and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amarjeet vs State of Up and Another

Narendra Singh Yadav vs State of Up 2 Others

Chandra Prakash vs State of Up and Another

Ram Chandar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy./Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Ram Chandar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy./Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Bhura @ Brijesh @ Vijay and Another vs State of Up Others