The High Court allowed the anticipatory bail application of Vikas Babu in a case involving cheating and forgery charges, granting bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. relying on Supreme Court precedents.
Anticipatory bail granted till conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties under specified conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:115757
Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6066 of 2024
Applicant :- Vikas Babu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.
the case of " Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98", the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.
i. The applicant shall not leave India during the pendency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
ii. The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.
iii. 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;
iv. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant.
v. In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail, the trial Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law.
vi. The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 22.7.2024 Meenu Singh
Digitally signed by :- MEENU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in anticipatory bail application u/s 438 Cr.P.C.
Whether the applicant shall remain present before the trial court on the dates fixed for opening of the case, framing of charge and recording of statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C.
Whether the applicant shall file an undertaking that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)Explained¶11
Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98 · Who else cites this
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Vikas Babu
State of U.P.
Deepak Verma
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Deepak Verma
Parties & counsel
