Allowed

Ramu Alias Ram Kumar v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC5 Aug 2024ABAIL/7627/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in a criminal case under Sections 376, 328, and 120-B IPC. Relying on Sushila Aggarwal, the Court found the applicant falsely implicated and lacking criminal history, subject to standard conditions for cooperation and non-interference.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till filing of charge-sheet, subject to personal bond with sureties and conditions.

Ramu Alias Ram Kumar vs State of Up and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:131148

¶2

Court No. - 71

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7627 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ramu Alias Ram Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Srivastava,Ramesh Chand Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

Present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.605 of 2022, under Sections 376, 328, 120-B of IPC, Police Station Narkhi, District Firozabad.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that initially, the FIR was lodged under Section 363 of IPC and during investigation, Sections 376, 328, 120-B were added. The applicant is not named in the FIR and his name is surfaced in the statement of the informant, when he was interrogated third time after recording the statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr PC. In the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of Cr PC, the victim has even not named the applicant and she has specifically stated the she had gone to the house of her friend. The victim was medically examined and no external or internal injury is found. The applicant is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive and has an apprehension of his arrest. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. The applicant has no previous criminal history.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶10

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98, the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.

¶11

Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either way, which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the

¶12

anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed.

¶13

In the event of his arrest, applicant - Ramu alias Ram Kumar, involved in the aforesaid case crime, shall be released on anticipatory bail till filing of charge-sheet, 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:-

¶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; iii. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶16

iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶17

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

¶18

vi. that the applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned and, if he has a Passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the SSP/SP concerned.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have a liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶20

It is made clear that the observations made herein-above shall not, in any way, affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 13.8.2024 RKK/-

¶21

Digitally signed by :- RAJ KUMAR KANNAUJIA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramu Alias Ram Kumar v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramu Alias Ram Kumar v. State of Up 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

Bhurey Yadav @ Ved Prakash vs State of U.P. and Another

Shubham Sachan @ Shambhu vs State of U.P. and Another

Dr Arjun Singh vs State of Up and Another

Tushar Tyagi @ Golu vs State of U.P. and Another

Bharat Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Durga Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another