Ram Aher and Another Vs Staet of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11298

¶2

Court No. - 30

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 183 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Ram Aher And Another Opposite Party :- Staet Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Dr. Pooja Singh,Abhishek Yadav,Surya Prakash Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.

¶7

Written instructions filed today is taken on record.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶9

The instant application has been moved by the applicants- Ram Aher and Vind Lal alias Bindu, in Case Crime No. 267 of 2023, under Sections 308, 323, 325, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Akhandnagar, District- Sultanpur with the prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail, as they are apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.

¶10

Learned counsel for the accused-applicants while pressing the anticipatory bail application submits that it is a case of cross F.I.R. and applicants have falsely been implicated in this case. In both the FIRs charge sheet has been filed. All the offences mentioned in the impugned First Information Report carry the sentence less than 7 years of imprisonment. The applicants are not having any criminal antecedents. The investigating agency did not arrest the applicants during the course of investigation, which prima facie shows that the applicants have cooperated with the investigation thoroughly and since the charge sheet has been filed, there is no occasion for the police to have sought the

¶11

custody of the applicants as there appears no need for custodial interrogation. There is no apprehension that after being released on anticipatory bail, they may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.

¶12

Learned AGA for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of bail of the applicants.

¶13

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is reflected that during the course of investigation, the investigating agency has not arrested the applicants. Admittedly, the charge sheet has now been filed. All the offences levelled against the applicants are punishable with less than seven years of imprisonment. There is a cross FIR, in which charge sheet has already been filed. Admittedly, the applicants are not having any criminal antecedents.

¶14

Thus, having regard to the above facts and keeping in view the fact that sufficient material is available before this Court on the basis of which this anticipatory bail application may be finally adjudicated, the instant anticipatory bail application moved by the applicants- Ram Aher and Vind Lal alias Bindu is, hereby, allowed and it is provided that in the event of arrest of the applicants- Ram Aher and Vind Lal alias Bindu, in the above-mentioned case under any process of the trial court or on their appearance/ surrender before the trial court within 20 days i.e. till 14.03.2025, whichever is earlier, they shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/ Investigating Officer/ trial Court subject to the following conditions:-

¶15

(i) The applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation or even for discovery of any fact by a police

¶16

officer as and when required, in case further investigation is directed;

¶17

(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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶18

(iii) The applicants shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court.

¶19

Applicants shall remain present before the trial court as and when their presence would be required and they would not take adjournment especially when the prosecution witnesses would be in attendance.

¶20

If in the opinion of the trial court default of any of the condition placed above is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of their bail and shall proceed against them in accordance with law.

¶21

It is clarified that all the observations contained in this order are only for disposal of this anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial proceedings in any manner.

¶22

Order Date :- 21.2.2025

¶23

G. Singh/-

¶24

Digitally signed by :- GURPREET SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Aher and Another v. Staet of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Aher and Another v. Staet of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

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

Tribhuwan Nath Jayaswal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Mujeeb vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Vivek Vishwas and Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Smt. Santosh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P. and Another

Mujeeb Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Smt. Bano @ Banno and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.