Allowed

Sonu Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Sept 2024ABAIL/8803/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for the applicant charged under Sections 304, 120-B IPC. The court held that after previously granting regular bail, the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail in added charges. The grant was made conditionally on executing a personal bond with two sureties and adhering to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail released on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties in the like amount, subject to conditions.

Sonu Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:155598

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8803 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Sonu Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Rai,Om Prakash Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Om Prakash Rai, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

This anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant- Sonu Kumar , seeking anticipatory bail in Session Case No. 139 of 2023, under Sections 304, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Loni, District Ghaziabad.

¶8

Prior notice of this anticipatory bail application was served in the office of the learned Government Advocate, High Court, Allahabad and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P. , this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned State counsel as per Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. (U. P. Amendment) is not required since learned counsel for the State informs the Court that he has received the required instructions in the matter.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that initially the applicant was granted regular bail in the present case crime number vide order dated 27.04.2023, under Sections 304-A / 34 I.P.C. and Sections 15 (2), 15 (3) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Ghaziabad but subsequently during investigation vide Parcha No. 56 dated 13.08.2023 Section 304-A I.P.C. was deleted and Section 304 I.P.C. was added after which the matter continued for investigation under Sections 304, 120-B, 34 I.P.C. and Sections 15 (2), 15 (3) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. It is submitted that there is no change in the facts & circumstances of the matter. It is submitted that the applicant had no intention to commit the aforesaid offence. While placing paragraph 19 to the affidavit it is submitted that investigation in the matter has

¶10

concluded and charge-sheet has been submitted. It is further submitted that in identical circumstances co-accused Javed Akhtar Siddqui and Rajiv Kumar have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide orders dated 29.03.2024 and 02.04.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. Nos. 3198 of 2024 and 3238 of 2024, the copy of the said orders are annexed as Annexure-16 to the affidavit. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 30 of the affidavit.

¶11

Per contra , learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶12

After having heard the learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant was initially granted regular bail vide order dated 27.04.2023, under Sections 304-A / 34 I.P.C. and Sections 15 (2), 15 (3) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 by the court concerned. Subsequently during investigation Section 304-A I.P.C. was deleted and Section 304 I.P.C. was added. The charge-sheet in the matter has been submitted. The Apex Court in the case of Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth Vs. State of Gujarat & another: (2016) 1 SCC (Cri) 240 and Manoj Suresh Jadhav & Others vs. State of Maharashtra: 2018 SCC OnLine SC 3428 has held that where the applicant has been enlarged on regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C., he can be enlarged on anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in added sections.

¶13

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the nature of accusation, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

¶14

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Sonu Kumar , involved in aforesaid case crime no. shall be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial on his 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:-

¶15

(i) the applicant shall make himself available on each and every date fixed in the matter by the court concerned.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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 concerned court.

¶18

In case, the applicant does not co-operate in the proceedings of the trial, this order shall stand automatically recalled/vacated and the applicant shall be taken into custody, forthwith.

¶19

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

¶20

The court concerned to proceed in the matter independently without being prejudice by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶21

The present anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶22

Order Date :- 24.9.2024 AS Rathore

¶23

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶24

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sonu Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu Kumar 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Krishna Kant vs State of U.P. and Another

Minor X vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anupam Pandey vs State of Up and Another

X Juvenile vs State of U.P. and Another

Krishna Kant Solanki vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Manoj Kumar Singh vs State of Up and Another