Satyendra Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P & Anr.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Complaint Case No.743 of 2020, under Section 18(a)(i), 17B(D), 17A(F) and 27(a) Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1940, Police Station Sonha, District Basti, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, inspite of the fact that there is no credible evidence against him yet the applicant has been summoned without any cogent evidence against him. It has further been submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail.

It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

In the event of arrest of the applicant Satyendra Kumar Yadav involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court subject to the following conditions :- i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicant shall appear on each and every dates fixed by the trial Court. iii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses. iv) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court. v) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission. vi) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. vi) In case, the applicant fails to appear on two consecutive dates, the order passed by this Court shall automatically stands vacated, unless there is some extraordinary circumstances. vii. The trial Court is directed to make all possible endeavours to consider and conclude the trial of the aforesaid case as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant in accordance with law. ABHISHEK SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Order Date :- 7.7.2025/AS