This criminal miscellaneous anticipatory bail application was filed by Suresh Kumar seeking bail based on parity with co-accused. The Court allowed the application without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.
Anticipatory bail granted for Case Crime No. 496 of 2022 with conditions to appear for interrogation and not tamper with evidence.
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:120568
Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6746 of 2024
Applicant :- Suresh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Yadav,Sushil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021, coupled with the judgment of Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 825 without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed on the ground of parity.
i. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
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;
iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
iv. that in case, the charge-sheet is submitted, the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
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;
Order Date :- 29.7.2024 Shalini
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail on the ground of parity with co-accused who have already been granted bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P.Referred¶11
1993 Crl.L.J. 938
Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of InvestigationReferred¶11
MANU/SCOR/22410/2021
Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and anotherReferred¶11
2022 SCC Online SC 825 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Suresh Kumar
Krishan Pahal
Shalini Jaiswal
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
