Allowed

Vishwajyoti Pathak v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Nov 2024ABAIL/11505/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail sought in a cheating and criminal intimidation FIR at Varanasi. Bail was granted on parity with a co-accused who had already received anticipatory bail, subject to standard conditions including cooperation with interrogation and trial attendance.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on personal bond and two sureties, with conditions.

Vishwajyoti Pathak vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:191569

¶2

Court No. - 65

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11505 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vishwajyoti Pathak Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ankur Jaiswal,Bipin Kumar Jaiswal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Ankur Jaiswal, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶8

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.132 of 2022 (State of U.P. vs. Vishwajyoti Pathak) registered under Sections 420, 323, 504, 506, 342 and 384 IPC at Police Station- Manduadeeh, District Varanasi with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that coaccused person Sudha Singh has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 16.11.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.10505 of 2022. Therefore, the present applicant is also entitled for anticipatory bail on the ground of parity. There is no criminal history of the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he will cooperate in the trial failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.

¶10

The prayer for anticipatory bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by him.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgements passed by the Supreme Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation,

¶12

MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 and in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another , (2022) 10 SCC 51 , the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶13

Let the accused-applicant- Vishwajyoti Pathak be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the 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;

¶19

(vi). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 6.12.2024 Ravi/-

¶23

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶24

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

Vishwajyoti Pathak v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishwajyoti Pathak v. State of U.P.

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

Ashutosh Bajpai vs State of Up

Ashish Mishra vs State of U.P.

Devi Dayal Singh vs State of Up and Another

Loknath vs State of U.P.

Sohail Ansari vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Pandey vs State of Up