High Court · 2025

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. The present application under Section 482 BNSS has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 31 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 308, 323, 324, 325 IPC, Police Station Mishrikh, District Sitapur. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 30.1.2025, following order was passed wherein the present applicants have been granted interim anticipatory bail:- “Learned counsel for the applicants prays that he may be allowed to withdraw the instant anticipatory bail application on behalf of applicant no. 1, namely, Mahesh and applicant no. 2, namely, Awadhesh Kumar @ Awadhesh. Learned State Counsel has no objection to the aforesaid prayer. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application is hereby dismissed with respect to applicant nos. 1 and 2 with liberty to file afresh. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The instant application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to release them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 31 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 308, 323, 324, 325 IPC, Police Station Mishrikh, District Sitapur. Contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that applicants, including three other persons have received serious injuries and thereafter the First Information Report has been lodged and in retaliation thereof, the informant has lodged the First Information Report while showing three persons to be injured from his side. He submits that incident in question was occurred on 09.01.2020 and the applicants have cooperated in the investigation proceedings and the chargesheet has been filed and there is no complaint that the applicants are not appearing before the trial court. He next added that no custodial interrogation is required and, thus, the applicants may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicants are involved in committing the offence, as such, they are not entitled for any relief. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, it transpires that the incident pertains to the year, 2020; there is a cross version of the FIR; both the sides received injuries; the applicants have cooperated in the investigation proceedings and chargesheet has been filed in the matter and there is no complaint that the applicants are not appearing before the trial court and the applicant nos. 3, 4 and 5 have no previous criminal history, this Court finds it to be a fit case for grant of interim anticipatory bail to applicant nos. 3, 4 and 5. Accordingly, till the next date of listing, applicant nos. 3, 4 and 5, namely, Dharmendra, JItendra and Ankit respectively, shall be released forthwith, in the event of their arrest, in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on their furnishing personal bonds and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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 or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that in case chargesheet is submitted the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; (v) that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness; (vi) that the applicants 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. Let notice be issued to opposite party no. 2, returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week. If the steps are taken, the office shall proceed accordingly. List/put up this matter in the first week of March, 2025. In the meantime, learned counsel for the State as well as opposite party no. 2 shall file their counter affidavits.” From perusal of the order dated 30.1.2025, it transpires that learned State Counsel was directed to file counter affidavit but the same has not been filed as yet. Learned State Counsel has failed to demonstrate that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on an interim anticipatory bail after thoroughly considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceedings or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicants, namely, Dharmendra, JItendra and Ankit till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this order. Order Date :- 6.3.2025 Shravan SHRAVAN KUMAR SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. The present application under Section 482 BNSS has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 31 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 308, 323, 324, 325 IPC, Police Station Mishrikh, District Sitapur. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 30.1.2025, following order was passed wherein the present applicants have been granted interim anticipatory bail:- “Learned counsel for the applicants prays that he may be allowed to withdraw the instant anticipatory bail application on behalf of applicant no. 1, namely, Mahesh and applicant no. 2, namely, Awadhesh Kumar @ Awadhesh. Learned State Counsel has no objection to the aforesaid prayer. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application is hereby dismissed with respect to applicant nos. 1 and 2 with liberty to file afresh. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The instant application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to release them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 31 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 308, 323, 324, 325 IPC, Police Station Mishrikh, District Sitapur. Contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that applicants, including three other persons have received serious injuries and thereafter the First Information Report has been lodged and in retaliation thereof, the informant has lodged the First Information Report while showing three persons to be injured from his side. He submits that incident in question was occurred on 09.01.2020 and the applicants have cooperated in the investigation proceedings and the chargesheet has been filed and there is no complaint that the applicants are not appearing before the trial court. He next added that no custodial interrogation is required and, thus, the applicants may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicants are involved in committing the offence, as such, they are not entitled for any relief. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, it transpires that the incident pertains to the year, 2020; there is a cross version of the FIR; both the sides received injuries; the applicants have cooperated in the investigation proceedings and chargesheet has been filed in the matter and there is no complaint that the applicants are not appearing before the trial court and the applicant nos. 3, 4 and 5 have no previous criminal history, this Court finds it to be a fit case for grant of interim anticipatory bail to applicant nos. 3, 4 and 5. Accordingly, till the next date of listing, applicant nos. 3, 4 and 5, namely, Dharmendra, JItendra and Ankit respectively, shall be released forthwith, in the event of their arrest, in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on their furnishing personal bonds and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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 or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that in case chargesheet is submitted the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; (v) that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness; (vi) that the applicants 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. Let notice be issued to opposite party no. 2, returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week. If the steps are taken, the office shall proceed accordingly. List/put up this matter in the first week of March, 2025. In the meantime, learned counsel for the State as well as opposite party no. 2 shall file their counter affidavits.” From perusal of the order dated 30.1.2025, it transpires that learned State Counsel was directed to file counter affidavit but the same has not been filed as yet. Learned State Counsel has failed to demonstrate that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on an interim anticipatory bail after thoroughly considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceedings or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicants, namely, Dharmendra, JItendra and Ankit till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this order. Order Date :- 6.3.2025 Shravan SHRAVAN KUMAR SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench