Anil and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:180067

Court No. - 69

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10858 of 2024

Applicant :- Anil And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State- opposite party and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

This application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 280 of 2023, under Sections 306, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Etmadpur, District Agra.

¶8

Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the instant case due to village party bandi with mala fide intention. The applicants have not given any kind of threats to the deceased. In fact, the deceased was heavy drinker and of bad character person, due to the reasons, he committed suicide himself. As per the allegations in the first information report, the necessary ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 306 I.P.C. are not made out. The applicant, in no manner, abetted the commission of suicide by the deceased. In support of his submission, counsel for the applicants has placed reliance on the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Amalendu Pal vs. State of West Bengal arising out of Criminal Appeal No. 2091 of 2009 decided on 11.11.2009 . The applicants have no criminal antecedents. It is next submitted that the investigation is going on and the applicants have apprehension of their arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶10

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicant and the fact that as per the allegations in the first information report, the necessary ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 306 I.P.C. are not made out. At this stage,

¶11

there is no substantive evidence against the applicants, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report.

¶12

In the event of arrest, the applicants- Anil, Pranesh and Jwala Prasad be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The applicants shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶14

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

¶15

(iii) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by them, before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶16

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.

¶17

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudiced by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicants.

¶18

The applicants are directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

¶19

The application stands disposed of .

¶20

Order Date :- 18.11.2024 Ravi Prakash

¶21

(Ashutosh Srivastava, J.)

¶22

Digitally signed by :- RAVI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anil and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

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