Allowed

Salim and 3 Others v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC31 Aug 2024ABAIL/8310/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to applicants falsely implicated in a case under Section 353 IPC, noting they were not named in the initial FIR and the investigating officer's report was in their favor. The court considered the nature of the offence, lack of criminal antecedents, and submission of charge sheet.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each.

Salim and 3 Others vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:157393

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8310 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Salim And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akash Pundir,Pawan Singh Pundir Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by counsel for the applicants is taken on record.

¶7

Heard counsel for the applicants, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

The present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants in Case Crime No. 182 of 2020, under Section 353 I.P.C., Police Station- Sikhera, District- Muzaffarnagar.

¶9

Counsel for the applicants contends that the applicants were not named in the first information report and have been falsely implicated in the instant case. The name of the applicants surfaced during investigation. After investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted a report in favour of the applicants. However, on the direction of the Circle Officer, the investigation was conducted again and charge-sheet has been submitted. It is next contended that for the offences alleged, the maximum punishment provided is for a term of two years. The applicants had cooperated in the investigation. No custodial interrogation is required. The applicants have been summoned by the concerned court. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. The applicants have apprehension of their arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶10

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

¶11

Having regard to the submissions made by counsel for the applicants, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicant and the fact that the applicant was not named in the first information report. For the offences alleged, the maximum punishment provided is for a term of two years. Charge sheet has

¶12

been submitted. The applicants had cooperated in the investigation and no custodial interrogation is required, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶13

In the event of arrest, the applicants Salim, Rakib, Akhtar and Noordin involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i) the applicants shall make themselves available on each date fixed in the matter by the court concerned;

¶15

(ii) the applicants 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;

¶16

(iii) the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport the same shall be deposited by them before the concerned court.

¶17

In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.

¶18

The application stands disposed of.

¶19

Order Date :- 26.9.2024 Sachin Mishra

¶20

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

Salim and 3 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salim and 3 Others 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Prempal and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Gulam Ali vs State of U.P.

Sarvan Kumar vs State of U.P.

Ravi vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shiv Singh vs State of U.P.

Haridarshan @ Darshan Singh vs State of U.P. though it Principal Secretary and Another