Ravi Shankar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:8698

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 76 of 2024

Applicant :- Ravi Shankar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Learned AGA informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter including up-to-date case diary and the charge-sheet in this case has already been submitted.

¶7

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

¶8

The present application has been moved by the accusedapplicant- Ravi Shankar in Case Crime No. 113 of 2023, under Sections 279,304 I.P.C., Police Station Nigohan, District Lucknow, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as he is apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant while pressing the anticipatory bail application submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution.

¶10

It is further submitted that nobody has claimed to have seen the applicant driving the impugned motorcycle by which the accident is shown to have been caused resulting in the death of the deceased. It is also submitted that in support of the allegation that it was the applicant who, at the relevant point of time, was driving the motorcycle, there is only and only the statement of the owner of the motorcycle and it appears that he has deposed against the applicant only to save his skin as in normal course of events, he should have been held liable for causing the accident as he is also holding a valid driving licence and apart from untrustworthy statement of the owner of the motorcycle, there is nothing on record or has been collected by the investigating officer during the course of the investigation which may even prima facie suggest that the applicant at the relevant point of time was driving the vehicle.

¶11

It is also submitted that a shallow investigation has been

¶12

made by the investigating officer and without there being any cogent material and without due identification of the applicant by those who have claimed to have witnessed the accident, the charge-sheet has been submitted.

¶13

It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case without making arrest of the applicant and the applicant is ready to cooperate in the trial as he has cooperated in the investigation. It is undertaken that he will not seek any adjournment while the prosecution witnesses would be in attendance and would remain present as and when his presence would be required.

¶14

It is further submitted that applicant is a respectable citizen of the locality and is having no criminal history. The investigating officer without there being any cogent and reliable material/evidence is making all out efforts to apprehend/arrest the applicant and there is no apprehension that after being granted facility of anticipatory bail, applicant may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty. Thus, protection from arrest be granted to him.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. on the other hand opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant but could not confront the factual submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶16

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is reflected that the only evidence which appears to be against the applicant with regard to him driving the motorcycle at the relevant point of time is the statement of the owner of the motorcycle and beyond that, there appears no incriminating material against the applicant. It has been argued with considerable force on behalf of the applicant that without holding Test Identification Parade (TIP) or without identification of the applicant by any known mode of identification, the chargesheet should not have been filed and it appears that a shallow investigation has been made. Thus, without considering the merits and demerits of the case, I find substance in the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant to the tune that the investigating officer appears to have believed the statement of the vehicle owner so far as the allegation of driving the impugned motorcycle by the applicant at the relevant point of time is concerned. Moreover, the applicant is not having criminal antecedents.

¶17

Thus having regard to the reasons mentioned above and keeping in view the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors., MANU/SC/1021/2010, Sushila Aggarwal and Ors.

¶18

Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and Ors., MANU/SC/0100/2020, Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and Ors. v. State of Punjab, MANU/SC/0215/1980 : 1980 (2) SCC 565, and Nathu Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others:(2021) 6 SCC 64 , in the considered opinion of this court, having regard to the material/evidence available against the applicant, the applicant may be provided protection from arrest.

¶19

Thus the instant anticipatory bail application is allowed and it is provided that in the event of arrest of the applicant- Ravi Shankar, in the above-mentioned case under any process of the trial court or on his/her appearance/surrender before the trial court within 20 days from today, i.e., till 20.02.2024 whichever is earlier, he shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail on his/her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶20

(1) The applicant shall make himself/herself available for interrogation or even for discovery of any fact by a police officer as and when required, in case further investigation is directed.

¶21

(2) 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶22

(3) The applicant shall not leave the country concerned without the previous permission of the Court.

¶23

Applicant shall remain present before the trial court as and when his/her presence would be required and he would not take adjournment especially when the prosecution witnesses would be in attendance.

¶24

If in the opinion of the trial court default of any of the condition placed above is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and shall proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶25

It is clarified that all the observations contained in this order are only for disposal of this anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial proceedings in any manner.

¶26

Order Date :- 30.1.2024 Shravan

¶27

Digitally signed by :- PRAVEEN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ravi Shankar v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Shankar v. State of U.P. Thru. 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ashik Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow, U.P. and 3 Others

Anoop Kumar Chaudhari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Home Sectt. Lucknow

Sharafat Ali Alias Sarafraz Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and 3 Others

Renu Rai @ Soni Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home and 2 Others

Naveen Jayaswal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Bade @ Anuj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.