Sumit Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:145702

Court No. - 72

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8426 of 2024 Applicant :- Sumit Yadav And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Aditya Yadav,Shivam Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Anupam Anand, learned Brief Holder for the State- opposite party, and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 B.N.S.S. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 212 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3), 118(1), 140(4) B.N.S., Police Station Sipari, District Jhansi.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the instant case. The first informant was the eye witness. In the first information report and in the statement of the informant there is no allegation of kidnapping or abduction against the applicants. In the statement of the victim allegation of abduction has been levelled. It is contended that the said statement is an afterthought and it discredits the prosecution case. Further, in the alleged incident injuries sustained by the victim are simple in nature. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. It is next submitted that the investigation is going on and the applicants have apprehension of their arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶8

Learned Brief Holder for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that the application for grant of anticipatory bail be confined only till the submission of police report.

¶10

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants and, in particular, the fact that in the first information report and in the statement of the informant, who was an eye witness, there is no allegation of kidnapping or

¶11

abduction against the applicants, and the injuries sustained by the victim are simple in nature, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report.

¶12

In the event of arrest, the applicants- Sumit Yadav and Shiv Kumar Yadav be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 193 (3) B.N.S.S., on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

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

¶14

(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 or to any police officer;

¶15

(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 S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶16

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.

¶17

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudiced by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicants.

¶18

The applicants are directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

¶19

The application stands disposed of.

¶20

Order Date :- 6.9.2024/SKT/-

¶21

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

Sumit Yadav and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumit Yadav and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases