Allowed

Lalit and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC8 Jul 2024ABAIL/5107/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted anticipatory bail to five applicants in a criminal case involving various IPC and CT Act sections. The court ordered bail based on parity with co-accused already granted bail, noting the absence of material showing tampering or witness intimidation, despite the applicants' criminal history.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed subject to bond with sureties and conditions regarding interrogation, non-interference, and availability for trial.

Lalit and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:134161

¶2

Court No. - 68

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5107 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Lalit And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Prakash Dubey,Prashant Kumar Dubey

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Anand Prakash Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material available on record.

¶8

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case Crime No. 102 of 2017, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 186, 332, 336, 353, 352, 427, 307, 504 & 506 IPC, Sections 3/4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station - Sardhana, District - Meerut, with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.

¶9

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicants has claimed parity with the co-accused Manzoor Malik and Anil Kumar Gupta who have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 3205 of 2024 vide order dated 01.04.2024. Since the case of the applicants is at par with the co-accused person, who have already been granted anticipatory bail, the applicants are also entitled for the same on the ground of parity.

¶10

It is further stated that the applicants have criminal history of two cases which has been explained as they are petty cases and the applicants have been bailed out in the said cases. The instant case was instituted at the behest of police.

¶11

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

¶12

In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and

¶13

another, (2020) 11 SCC 648 , the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail.

¶14

In so far as criminal antecedents of the applicants is concerned, it is not the case of the State that applicants might tamper with or otherwise adversely influence the investigation, or that they might intimidate witnesses before or during the trial. The State has also not placed any material that applicants in past attempted to evade the process of law. If the accused is otherwise found to be entitled to bail, he cannot be denied bail only on the ground of criminal history, no exceptional circumstances on the basis of criminal antecedents have been shown to deny bail to accused, hence, the Court does not feel it proper to deny bail to the applicants just on the ground of criminal antecedents.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, evidence on record, pending trial and in the 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 judgement passed by the Supreme Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 coupled with the judgement of Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825 , without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.

¶16

Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶17

In the event of arrest of the applicants, Lalit, Salim Ahmad, Sahid, Moh Khalid and Abid Ansari, involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-

¶18

i. that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; ii. that 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

v. that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶22

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

¶23

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the anticipatory bail of the applicants.

¶24

It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicants shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶25

Order Date:- 21.8.2024 Siddhant

¶26

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶27

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Lalit and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalit and 4 Others 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

Rajesh Kumar Srivastava vs State of U.P. and Another

Jabbar vs State of Up and Another

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

Nayaz Bano Alias Niyaaz Bano and Another vs State of U.P.

Pankaj Tiwari vs State of Up and Another

Ram Kishor vs State of U.P. and Another