Disposed

Vijay Shankar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC30 Aug 2024ABAIL/8200/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court of Allahabad, hearing an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C., granted provisional direction for bail to the applicant. The order invokes parity with a co-accused, lacks a merit opinion, imposes monetary conditions, and mandates an expeditious trial timeline.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted with personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties each; condition of weekly reporting to police and expeditious trial within six months.

Vijay Shankar vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:139503

¶2

Court No. - 66

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8200 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vijay Shankar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mary Puncha (Sheeb Jose),Mohd. Kalim,Prabha Shanker Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case No. 250 of 2023, arising out of Misc. Case No. 321 of 2019, in Case Crime No.844 of 2018, under Sections 376D, 506 IPC, State Vs. Shiv Narayan and others, Police Station Meja, District Prayagraj.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case just to harass the applicant. It has further submitted that the co-accused Akash Kumar has already been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 29.4.2024 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 2423 of 2024, therefore the applicant also entitled to pre- arrest bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is having no previous criminal history.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant but could not dispute with the aforesaid facts.

¶10

Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicants, they are directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶11

In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on

¶12

anticipatory bail. Let the applicant - Vijay Shankar involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation.

¶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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

¶15

(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶16

(iv) The applicant shall surrenders his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.

¶17

(v) 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.

¶18

(vi) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

¶19

(vii) 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 his in accordance with law.

¶20

In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.

¶21

With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands disposed of.

¶22

9.However, the trial court is directed to proceed with the trial and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of the production of the certified copy of this order.

¶23

Order Date :- 30.8.2024/A.

¶24

Digitally signed by :- AFAQ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vijay Shankar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Shankar v. State of U.P.

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

Smt Rinky vs State of U.P. and Another

Sonu vs State of U.P. and Another

Badre Alam vs State of Up and Another

Vishnudev Patwa @ Jheen and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Sharnbeer vs State of U.P.

Ved Prakash and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another