Partly allowed

Shakun Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Nov 2024ABAIL/10588/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court granted interim anticipatory bail protection in a matrimonial dispute pending case involving Sections 323 and 307 IPC, citing inordinate FIR delay, without entering into the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Interim protection under Section 438 Cr.P.C. granted subject to surrender within twenty days, furnishing bond and sureties, and adhering to specified conditions including cooperation with trial.

Shakun Sharma vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10588 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Shakun Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rewti Raman Patel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶5

The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.34 of 2020, under Sections 323, 307 I.P.C., P.S. Gulawati, District Bulandshahr.

¶6

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

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that F.I.R. has been lodged after delay of six months without any explanation. It is a case of no injury. The matrimonial dispute is going on between the informant and the applicant who are wife and husband. Applicant was earlier granted anticipatory bail however, after filing of the charge-sheet the life of the anticipatory bail granted earlier has come to an end. The charge-sheet has been filed and after filing of charge-sheet summons have been issued.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the trial.

¶9

Issue notice to respondent No. 2.

¶10

Learned Addl. Government Advocate opposes the bail application. He prays for and is allowed ten days' time to file counter affidavit. List on 11.12.2024.

¶11

In the meantime, parties shall exchange their pleadings.

¶12

On due consideration to the argument advanced as well as perusal of the record and the fact that matrimonial dispute is pending between the husband and wife, the inordinate delay in lodging the F.I.R. and also considering the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be

¶13

appropriate to grant interim protection to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶14

Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in case the applicant surrender himself before the trial court within twenty days from today, the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶15

(1) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial and he will not influence the witnesses.

¶16

(2) The accused-applicant will remain present on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 19.11.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶19

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

Shakun Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakun Sharma 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Amit Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Udaybhan Singh and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Km Arju Alias Jagrati vs State of U.P. and Another

Gufran Ali vs State of Up and Another

state of up vs Nikhil alias Rishabh so Manoj Kumar

Atar Pal Singh vs State of U.P.