Allowed

Amitendra Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Oct 2024/2052/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed anticipatory bail application. Applicant was in investigation stage, not named in FIR, and sought parity with a co-accused. Court directed surrender within 20 days to be enlarged Anticipatory Bail by Trial Court.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; Applicant directed to surrender before Trial Court within 20 days to be enlarged on Anticipatory Bail.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:70254

¶2

Court No. - 31

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2052 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Amitendra Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Indu Prakash Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

(Through Video Conferencing)

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. apprehending his arrest in Case Crime No.135/2024, under Sections 307, 504, 427 I.P.C., P.S. Cantt. District Faizabad/Ayodhya.

¶8

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

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is a case of no injury. Applicant is not named in the F.I.R. and his name is surfaced during investigation in the statement of co-accused. Applicant submits that role of Ansh Vikram Singh who has been granted anticipatory bail is similar to that of present applicant. Applicant seeks parity. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that applicant has cooperated in the investigation and further undertakes to cooperate in the trial.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application, however, could not dispute the fact that it is a case of parity and no one is injured in this case. The charge-sheet in the matter has been filed.

¶11

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record so also the fact that charge-sheet in the case has been filed, applicant is not named in the F.I.R. and the fact that applicant seeks parity with the bail order of co-accused Ansh Vikram Singh, he has cooperated in the investigation and he shall cooperate in the trial, it would be expedient in the interest of justice that the liberty of the applicant may be protected in view of dictum of Apex Court

¶12

in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.

¶13

In view of the above, since, charge-sheet in the matter has been filed, the applicant is directed to surrender himself before the trial court within twenty days from today. In case of such surrender, the trial court shall enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i) 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 tamper with the evidence;

¶15

(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶16

(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶17

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

¶18

(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;

¶19

Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed.

¶20

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

¶21

In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed.

¶22

Order Date :- 18.10.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Amitendra Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amitendra Singh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sahil Kumar Sonkar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Suraj Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Lalit Kumar Tiwari and Another vs NTPC Ltd. Thru. Cmd New Delhi and 2 Others

Vinay Bajpai vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 4 Others

Smt. Smriti Singh and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko and Another

Sunil Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another