Lakshmi Narayanchaudhary @ Lakshmi Nath Chaudhary Vs State of Up Others

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:126186

¶2

Court No. - 82

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 62 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Lakshmi Narayanchaudhary @ Lakshmi Nath Chaudhary

¶5

Opposite Party :- State Of Up Others Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. S.B. Maurya, learned A.G.A.-I for the State.

¶8

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 36 of 2006, under Sections 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 201, 218, 477-A, 120-B/34 IPC and Section 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Maniyar, District Ballia, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that on the basis of false allegation, applicant has been made accused in the present matter and on 14.07.2021 during investigation, he has been enlarged on interim anticipatory bail and order passed by this Court has been annexed at page no. 36 of the paper book but now charge sheet has been filed and there is no allegation that during investigation, applicant did not cooperate with the investigation.

¶10

He further submitted that applicant is having apprehension, if he will appear before the court concerned then he will be sent to jail.

¶11

He further submitted that as investigation of the case has already been concluded, therefore, custodial interrogation of the applicant does not appear to be necessary.

¶12

He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history.

¶13

He further submitted that therefore, considering the above facts,

¶14

applicant should be enlarged on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial.

¶15

Per contra, learned A.G.A. however, opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶16

I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶17

From the record, it reflects, during investigation, applicant was enlarged on interim anticipatory bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court and pursuant to the order dated 14.07.2021, applicant has not been arrested during investigation and there is no allegation that during investigation, applicant did not cooperate with the investigation.

¶18

Further, now charge sheet has been filed. This Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that after submission of charge sheet, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant.

¶19

Further, considering the general practice adopted by the courts now-a-days, apprehension of arrest raised by applicant cannot be completely ruled out.

¶20

Further, applicant is not having any criminal history.

¶21

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial.

¶22

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶23

In the event of arrest of the applicant -Lakshmi Narayanchaudhary @ Lakshmi Nath Chaudhary involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-

¶24

i. 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 or tamper with the evidence;

¶25

ii. that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;

¶26

iii. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶27

iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶28

v . that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶29

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶30

It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶31

Order Date :- 29.7.2025

¶32

KK Patel

¶33

Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Lakshmi Narayanchaudhary @ Lakshmi Nath Chaudhary v. State of Up Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lakshmi Narayanchaudhary @ Lakshmi Nath Chaudhary v. State of Up Others

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