Allowed

Ravindra Kumar Nishad v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Nov 2024ABAIL/10996/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal, J. allowed anticipate bail application filed by Ravindra Kumar Nishad in case registered for Sections 323, 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 495, 504, 506 IPC. Bail granted with standard conditions and on furnishing sureties.

What did the court decide?

Accused-applicant enlarged on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on furnishing personal and two sureties subject to conditions specified.

Ravindra Kumar Nishad vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:196823

¶2

Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10996 of 2024 Applicant :- Ravindra Kumar Nishad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shweta Nishad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶4

Heard Ms. Shweta Nishad, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Jai Kishan Chaurasiya, learned State Law Officer as well as perused the record.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant today is taken on record.

¶6

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.0521 of 2024, registered under Section 323, 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 495, 504, 506 IPC at Police Station- Pipraich, District Gorakhpur with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶7

The applicant is stated to have established corporeal relationship with the victim and married her during the subsistence of his earlier marriage by posing that his earlier wife had expired on 20.04.2014 itself. It was revealed to the informant that the earlier wife of the applicant was still alive and he had three children from his earlier marriage. As such, the FIR was instituted by the police on 22.06.2024.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. The instant FIR is just a misuse of process of court as she had started living with another person. Learned counsel has further argued that the applicant had filed an application before the concerned Sub-Registrar for refraining the informant to sell the said property which was in her name given by the applicant himself. It is next stated that there is original Suit No.1496 of 2023 pending before the court of Civil Judge, Junior Division, Gorakhpur.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the instant FIR is just a counter-blast to the said application. It is next stated that there is a criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant which has been explained in the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is on bail in the said case which has been annexed as

¶10

Annexure-1 to the affidavit dated 25.11.2024.

¶11

Per contra, learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned State Law Officer and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1" . The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court.

¶13

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Ravindra Kumar Nishad 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 Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

i. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶15

ii. that 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶16

iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶17

iv. that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶18

v. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; vi. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶19

vii. that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶20

It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.

¶21

Order Date :- 16.12.2024 Sumit S

¶22

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ravindra Kumar Nishad v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravindra Kumar Nishad 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

Sunil vs State of Up and Another

Rahul vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Pappu vs State of U.P.

Rinkoo Rana Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Sumit Jaisawal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Vichitra Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.