Allowed

Amit Soni v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Oct 2024ABAIL/9912/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by Amit Soni. The applicant, charged with offences under IPC and the U.P. Public Examination Act, argued for bail based on parity with a co-accused who had already been granted bail. The court noted the applicant had no criminal history and allowed the prayer on grounds of parity.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties on the ground of parity, subject to standard conditions.

Amit Soni vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:167942

¶2

Court No. - 65

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9912 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Amit Soni Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prem Chandra Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Prem Chandra Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pranshu Kumar, 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 applicant in Case Crime No.414 of 2022 registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Section 9/10 U.P. Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1988 and Section 66 of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 at Police Station- Sikandara, District Agra with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that coaccused person Rajeev Sharma has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 25.4.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.3495 of 2023. Therefore, the present applicant is also entitled for anticipatory bail on the ground of parity. There is no criminal history of the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he 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

¶12

Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 and in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another , (2022) 10 SCC 51 , the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶13

Let the accused-applicant- Amit Soni be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

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

¶15

(ii). that 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 or tamper with the evidence;

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

(vi). that the applicant 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 :- 22.10.2024 Ravi/-

¶23

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶24

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

Amit Soni v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Soni 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

Sumit Rana vs State of Up and Another

Harshit and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Vijay Mall vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajveer Singh vs State of U.P.

Baba Seth Alias Baba Khan vs State of U.P. and Another

Shivam Rajput vs State of U.P. and Another