Allowed

Balraj Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC4 Oct 2024ABAIL/9861/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An anticipatory bail application was filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. by four applicants in a case involving Section 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC. The High Court allowed the application on the ground of parity with a co-accused and imposed standard conditions for bail.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted to the applicants until the conclusion of the trial on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each.

Balraj Singh and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:167455

¶2

Court No. - 65

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9861 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Balraj Singh And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Shrivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Anurag Shrivastava, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶8

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case Crime No.271 of 2022 registered under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act at Police Station- Dhampur, District Bijnor with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the coaccused person Suresh has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 10.4.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. Nos.3624 of 2024. Therefore, the present applicants are also entitled for anticipatory bail on the ground of parity. There is no criminal history of the applicants. Learned counsel for the applicants undertake that they 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

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.

¶12

Central Bureau of Investigation and Another , (2022) 10 SCC 51 , the Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶13

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the accused-applicants- Balraj Singh, Smt. Vidhayavati @ Vidhho, Surendra Singh and Smt. Priti be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

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

¶15

(ii). that 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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 21.10.2024 Ravi/-

¶23

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶24

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

Balraj Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balraj Singh and 3 Others 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

Shrikrishna Ram vs State of U.P.

Awadesh Kumar Singh vs State of U.P.

Surendra Sharma vs State of U.P. and Another

Pappu vs State of U.P.

Fateh Mohammad vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Sunil vs State of Up and Another