Jitendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:30663

Court No. - 82

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11874 of 2024

Applicant :- Jitendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

Present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant - Jitendra Kumar Case Crime No. 0134 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station - Sarsawa, District- Sarahanpur.

¶7

Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶8

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of his arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. He has been falsely implicated into this matter. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. It is further submitted that vide order dated 3.12.2021, the applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 15920 of 2021 and he has not misused the interim protection granted to him. It is also submitted that after investigation, now charge sheet has been submitted in the matter. No custodial interrogation is required from the applicant. Applicant has no criminal history. He has been cooperative during investigation. There is no chance of fleeing away of the applicant.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record.

¶11

In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1 , the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the controversy finally by holding the anticipatory bail need not be of

¶12

limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.

¶13

It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial.

¶14

It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

¶15

Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till end of the trial in the matter.

¶16

The anticipatory bail application is accordingly allowed .

¶17

In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till end of the trial on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶18

(i) The applicant shall make himself available before the court concerned on the date fixed in the matter;

¶19

(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 him / her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶20

(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.

¶21

In case of default of any of the conditions, same may be a ground for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant.

¶22

Order Date :- 4.3.2025 safi

¶23

Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jitendra Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases