Amit Vs State of Up and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:166268

Court No. - 71

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9855 of 2024

Applicant :- Amit Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- Rajeev Kumar Pal,G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Rajeev Kumar Pal, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the record.

¶7

This anticipatory bail application has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime 58 of 2024, under Sections 376D and 506 of IPC, Police Station Bhopa, District Muzaffar Nagar during the pendency of trial.

¶8

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that initially an FIR was lodged by the applicant under Section 307 of IPC against the informant. To mount pressure upon the applicant, the present FIR has been lodged. It is submitted that eye witness of the incident namely Vimlesh has also changed his version and has not corroborated the version of prosecution. Medical report does not corroborate the allegation made in the FIR. It is submitted that there is no possibility of tempering the evidence. It has been stated that applicant is having apprehension of imminent arrest and that applicant has no criminal history and that in case, he is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate with the investigation.

¶9

Per-contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 have opposed the application for anticipatory bail but could not dispute the aforesaid aspect of the matter.

¶10

Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, taking into consideration the gravity of the accusation as well as the fact that there being no criminal antecedents of applicant and there

¶11

being no possibility of fleeing from justice and in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

¶12

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶13

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Amit involved in aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail till the 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 court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶14

(i) the applicant shall appear before the learned trial court on each date when the case is fixed unless exempted.

¶15

(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/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶16

(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.

¶17

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶18

Order Date :- 18.10.2024 Mohit

¶19

Digitally signed by :- MOHIT KUMAR KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Amit v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases