Allowed

Rohit Kumar v. State of Up

Allahabad HC2 Oct 2024NABAIL/8868/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed anticipatory bail application of Rohit Kumar, falsely implicated after a co-accused disclosed his name. Bail granted till police report submission with personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Granted anticipatory bail till submission of police report with personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties.

What the court decided

Rohit Kumar Vs State of Up — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:161461

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8868 of 2024 Applicant :- Rohit Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pushparaj Singh,Yash Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶5

Copy of the statement of co-accused Monu as well as CD-41 dated 24.09.2024 produced by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State- opposite party, and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 200 of 2023, under Sections 457, 380, 411, 413, 414 I.P.C., Police Station Pahadi, District Chitrakoot.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The name of the applicant was disclosed by co-accused Monu in police custody. The said statement insofar as it relates to the applicant is unreliable. In the CCTV footage the applicant was not seen nor identified. Prior to the instant case the applicant does not have any criminal history. However, after lodging of the instant first information report he has been implicated in another case, details whereof are mentioned in Paragraph-13 of the affidavit. It is next submitted that the investigation is going on and the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶10

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

¶11

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant and, in particular, the facts that the applicant was not named in the first information report, the name of the applicant was disclosed by co-accused Monu in police custody, and in the CCTV footage the applicant was not seen, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on

¶12

anticipatory bail till the submission of police report.

¶13

In the event of arrest, the applicant- Rohit Kumar be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., 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:-

¶14

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

¶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 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 is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶18

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 applicant.

¶19

The applicant is 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.

¶20

The application stands disposed of.

¶21

Order Date :- 3.10.2024 SKT/-

¶22

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

Rohit Kumar v. State of Up

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Rohit Kumar v. State of Up

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases