Allowed

Suryabhan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Jul 2024ABAIL/5966/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad granted anticipatory bail to the applicant, Suryabhan, in a case involving offenses under sections 354, 504, 506, and 376 IPC. The bail was granted contingent on the submission of the police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Released on anticipatory bail under section 438 Cr.P.C. subject to bond and specific conditions until the submission of the police report.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:114624

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5966 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Suryabhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sher Bahadur Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- Deeksha Gupta,G.A.,Siddharth Srivastava

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit, filed by the learned AGA, is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Siddharth Srivastava, counsel for the opposite party no.2. Perused the material placed on record.

¶8

This application under section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.115 of 2024, under sections 354, 504, 506, 376 I.P.C., P.S. Gambhirpur, District Azamgarh.

¶9

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The first information report was lodged by the victim herself under Section 354, 504, 506 I.P.C. The incident is alleged to have occurred in the year 2018. The first information report was lodged on 8.4.2024. There is no explanation for the delay in lodging the first information report. No obscene video was collected by the investigating officer. In the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C., for the first time, allegation of rape has been levelled against the applicant. The said inconsistency discredits the prosecution case. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is next submitted that the investigation is going on and the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. for the State and counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the application for grant of anticipatory bail be confined only till the submission of police report.

¶12

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for

¶13

the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report.

¶14

In the event of arrest, the applicant Suryabhan 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:-

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶18

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 applicant.

¶19

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 applicant.

¶20

The applicant is 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.

¶21

The application stands disposed of.

¶22

Order Date :- 18.7.2024 S.S.

¶23

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

Suryabhan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suryabhan 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vineet Kumar Alias Vinay Kumar Alias Monu vs State of U.P. and Another

Lotan Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahul Bind @ Rahul Kumar vs State of U.P.

Shaukeen vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sukhvinder Singh Lado and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Mukesh Sonkar @ Jimmi vs State of Up and Another