Allowed

Arun Yadav Alias Arun Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Aug 2024ABAIL/7962/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge granted anticipatory bail to the applicant pending completion of investigation until the submission of the police report, citing delays and inconsistencies in the prosecution's case.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted pending the submission of the police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties.

Arun Yadav Alias Arun Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P. and… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:130902

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7962 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Arun Yadav Alias Arun Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Chaudhary Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State- opposite party and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

This application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 251 of 2024, under Sections 452, 376, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Sarai Lakhansi, District Mau.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case due to certain other dispute between the parties. The victim herself is the informant. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 15.06.2024. The application for registration of F.I.R. was submitted on 14.07.2024. Subsequent, thereto, the F.I.R. was lodged. The inordinate delay in lodging the F.I.R. is fatal to the prosecution case. Initially, the F.I.R. was lodged under Sections 452, 354(b) and 506 I.P.C. The statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. is largely consistent with the F.I.R.. However, material changes have been made in the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. to aggravate the offence and save the failing prosecution case. The victim refused to get herself medically examined. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is further submitted that the investigation is going on and the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶10

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

¶11

Having regard to the submissions made by counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicant and the fact that the F.I.R. was lodged belatedly, the fact that there are major inconsistencies in the F.I.R., statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on the one hand and under Section 164 Cr.P.C. on the other, 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.

¶12

In the event of arrest, the applicant- Arun Yadav Alias Arun Kumar Yadav 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:-

¶13

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

¶14

(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;

¶15

(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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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.

¶18

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.

¶19

The application stands disposed of.

¶20

Order Date :- 13.8.2024 Sachin Mishra

¶21

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Arun Yadav Alias Arun Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Yadav Alias Arun Kumar Yadav 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

Similar cases

Shahzad and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Aman Chaddha vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dharmveer vs State of U.P. and Another

Vindhyachal Singh vs State of Up

Mangal Parmar vs State of U.P.

Sandeep and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another