Shailendra Kumar @ Pappu vs the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 88 of 2025

Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar @ Pappu Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ripu Daman Shahi,Suresh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶5

Sri Chandan Srivastava, Sri Viresh Pratap Singh and Sri Lavkush Yadav, Advocate have put in appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant, which is taken on record.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record.

¶8

The instant application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 219 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Police Station Safdarganj, District Barabanki.

¶9

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the applicant is neither marginal witness nor vendor nor vendee of the sale-deed in question and the applicant is also not the beneficiary of the sale-deed no amount of sale-consideration has ever been incredited in his account. He next added that the remote allegations have been levelled against the applicant, on the basis of confessional statement of one of the witness which is not supported with any documentary evidence. He also submits that 12 cases criminal history of the applicant has been explained and he is always cooperating with the investigation proceeding and he has never absconded. He submits that there is an acute apprehension that the police will arrest the present applicant and therefore, he may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶10

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the complainant has vehemently opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the material fact is concealed as NBW is issued against the applicant on 09.01.2024 and he further added

¶11

that the applicant is a key player and he is involved in committing the offence as is evident from the statements of several witnesses. He added that the applicant has as many as 12 cases criminal history and there is possibility that he will tamper the evidences, therefore, he is not entitled for any relief.

¶12

Learned AGA appearing for the State has also supported the version of learned counsel for the complainant and submits that there is ample evidence against the applicant and there is possibility that he will flee away from the investigation proceeding, as such he is not entitled for any relief.

¶13

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, it transpires that the First Information Report discloses that the applicant is neither vendor nor vendee nor marginal witness of sale-deed and no amount of sale consideration is incredited in his account, therefore, he is not the beneficiary of the sale-deed in question; this Court has also noticed that the applicant has explained the NBW, while filing the supplementary affidavit as well as he also explained 12 cases criminal history in the bail application; further the applicant has undertaken that he will not abscond from the investigating proceeding and he will remain present on each and every date as and when required by the Investigating Officer, therefore, no custodial interrogation is required; therefore this Court finds it to be a fit case for grant of interim anticipatory bail.

¶14

Accordingly, till the next date of listing, the present applicant- Shailendra Kumar @ Pappu , shall be released forthwith, in the event of his arrest, in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶15

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

¶16

(ii) 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;

¶17

(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶18

(iv) that in case chargesheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶19

(v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶20

(vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶21

(vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶22

List/put up this matter in the third week of February, 2025.

¶23

In the meantime, learned counsel for the opposite parties shall file their counter affidavits.

¶24

Order Date :- 21.1.2025 kkv/

¶25

Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shailendra Kumar @ Pappu v. the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shailendra Kumar @ Pappu v. the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home 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

Sukhdev Singh and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Abdul Aziz vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief / Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Nitin Kumar Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Virendra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Aneesh vs State of U.P Thru. Addil. Chief Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Govt. Lko.