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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to seven conditions (availability for interrogation; no inducement/threat/promise or evidence-tampering; no leaving India without previous permission of the court; no tampering with evidence after charge-sheet; no pressurising/intimidation of prosecution witnesses; attendance before the trial court on each fixed date unless exempted; liberty to the court concerned to cancel bail on breach of any condition).

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused-applicant Amresh is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 137 of 2023 (Sections 147, 149, 307, 332, 336, 353, 504, 506 and 34 IPC, P.S. Kheragarh, District Agra), particularly on the ground of parity with the co-accused Avdhesh who had already been granted anticipatory bail.

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and in light of the judgement in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P. (1993 Crl.L.J. 938) and the Supreme Court judgements in Paras Ram Vishnoi (MANU/SCOR/22410/2021) and Satender Kumar Antil ((2022) 10 SCC 51), the applicant has made out a case for anticipatory bail; the anticipatory bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

Ratio / Principle

The accused-applicant Amresh is to be released forthwith in Case Crime No. 137 of 2023 on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to seven enumerated conditions (availability for interrogation; no inducement/threat/promise or tampering with evidence; no leaving India without prior permission; no tampering after charge-sheet; no pressurising/intimidating prosecution witnesses; appearance before the trial court on each fixed date unless exempted; liberty to cancel bail on breach of any condition).

Key takeaways

The observations made in this order are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.obiter¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Court No. 65; Justice Krishan Pahal; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:22028; order dated 17.2.2025). Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 989 of 2025 filed by applicant Amresh in Case Crime No. 137 of 2023, registered under Sections 147, 149, 307, 332, 336, 353, 504, 506 and 34 IPC at Police Station Kheragarh, District Agra, was ALLOWED ON THE GROUND OF PARITY: co-accused Avdhesh had already been granted anticipatory bail by the same Court vide order dated 18.12.2023 (Anticipatory Bail Application No. 14004 of 2023), and the A.G.A., while opposing the prayer, did not dispute that factual aspect of parity. Counsel stated that the applicant's criminal history of one case stood explained and undertook cooperation in the trial, failing which the State could seek cancellation. The Court acted in light of its own earlier judgement in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P. (1993 Crl.L.J. 938) and Supreme Court judgements in Paras Ram Vishnoi (MANU/SCOR/22410/2021) and Satender Kumar Antil ((2022) 10 SCC 51); it also noted the Supreme Court's observation in Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of U.P. (2020 (11) SCC 648) that mere pendency of several criminal cases cannot by itself be a basis for refusing bail where the case for bail is otherwise made out. Applicant directed to be released forthwith on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to seven conditions, with liberty to the court concerned to cancel bail on breach; observations confined to deciding this application only and not to affect the trial.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:22028

Court No. - 65

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 989 of 2025

Applicant :- Amresh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

List has been revised.

Heard Sri Anand Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.137 of 2023 registered under Sections 147, 149, 307, 332, 336, 353, 504, 506 and 34 IPC at Police Station- Kheragarh, District Agra with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that coaccused person Avdhesh has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 18.12.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.14004 of 2023. Therefore, the present applicant is also entitled for anticipatory bail on the ground of parity. The criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant stands explained. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he will cooperate in the trial failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.

The prayer for anticipatory bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by him.

The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of U.P. And Another, 2020 (11) SCC 648 has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case for bail is made out.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgements passed by the Supreme Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 and in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another , (2022) 10 SCC 51 , the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

Let the accused-applicant- Amresh be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

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

(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;

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

(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

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

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

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

It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.

Order Date :- 17.2.2025 (Ravi Kant)

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

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