Allowed

Abhishek Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC29 Aug 2024ABAIL/8167/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by Abhishek Kumar Singh. Granted on the ground of parity with a co-accused, the court imposed standard conditions regarding appearance, non-interference, and travel restrictions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till conclusion of trial on personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions.

Abhishek Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:138492

¶2

Court No. - 68

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8167 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Abhishek Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Srivastava,Priyanka Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Arun Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶7

This is the second anticipatory bail application on behalf of the applicant. The first one was not rejected on merit rather it was rejected on the ground that the applicant has not explained his criminal antecedents.

¶8

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.396 of 2023 registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 506 IPC at Police Station- Rasra, District Ballia with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that coaccused person Abhishek Kumar Saini has already been granted anticipatory bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.2.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.483 of 2024. Therefore, the present applicant is also entitled for anticipatory bail on the ground of parity. The criminal history of five cases assigned to the applicant stands explained. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he will cooperate in the trial failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.

¶10

The prayer for anticipatory bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by him.

¶11

The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of U.P.

¶12

And Another, 2020 (11) SCC 648 has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case for bail is made out.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgements passed by the Supreme Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 and in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another , (2022) 10 SCC 51 , the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶14

Let the accused-applicant- Abhishek Kumar Singh be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶15

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

¶16

(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;

¶17

(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶18

(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶19

(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶20

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

¶21

(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶22

It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.

¶23

Order Date :- 29.8.2024 Ravi/-

¶24

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶25

Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Abhishek Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek Kumar Singh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dhiruddin Chaudhary Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mohd. Shaheem @ Kasim vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Santosh Kumar Gautam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Meghraj Singh and Another vs State of U.P.

Smt. Mamta Malik vs State of U.P.

Avnish vs State of U.P. and Another