Allowed

Santosh Shah v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Jan 2025ABAIL/11275/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the anticipatory bail application of the applicant facing charges under Section 406 IPC, relying on the legal position regarding continuous bail. The applicant was granted bail until the conclusion of trial subject to standard conditions including surrender of passport and undertaking not to seek undue adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till conclusion of trial on furnishing personal bond with two sureties and complying with specified conditions.

Santosh Shah vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:8588

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11275 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Santosh Shah Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dhiraj Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit has been filed today in the Court, is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Dhiraj Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and perused the record.

¶8

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.459 of 2022, under Section 406 I.P.C., Police Station-Meja, District-Prayagraj, till conclusion of trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is civil nature dispute and only to give criminal colour, the instant FIR has been lodged. I.O. has submitted charge sheet. No material evidence found against the applicant in the present case. Cognizance taken by learned Magistrate is without application of judicial mind. Applicant's counsel undertakes that applicant will co-operate in the trial, failing which, the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail. It has been submitted that in case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶10

On the other hand, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of " Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98", the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.

¶12

Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may be adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant- Santosh Shah, who is involved in the aforesaid crime, be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

i. The applicant shall not leave India during the pendency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶15

ii. The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.

¶16

iii. 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;

¶17

iv. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant.

¶18

v. In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail, the trial Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law.

¶19

vi. The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

Order Date :- 20.1.2025 Nitin Verma

¶21

Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Santosh Shah v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Shah 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Manoj Kesari vs State of U.P.

Dharmendra and 2 Others vs State of U.P.

Suggriv and Another vs State of U.P.

Irshad vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanju @ Rishabh Jaisawal vs State of Up

Wasim @ Saeed Afsar vs State of U.P.