High Court · 2025
Case Details
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
2. Instant second anticipatory bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the accused-applicant in Case Crime No. 316 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 193(3), 190, 115(2), 109, 61(2), 61(1), 61 of BNS and Section 7 of Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, Police Station Gangaghat, District Unnao.
3. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 25.11.2024 following order was passed, wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "Sri Mayank Dwivedi, Advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama as well as Short Counter Affidavit on behalf of the victim- injured and the same is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mayank Dwivedi, learned counsel for the victim-injured and learned AGA for the State. The instant application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 316 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 193(3), 190, 115(2), 109, 61(2) of BNS and Section 7 of Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, Police Station Gangaghat, District Unnao. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been planted by the police. He further added that the applicant was not present on the spot and this fact has also been verified by the injured of the incident while filing the affidavit before this Court. He next submits that other co-accused persons, who were arrested on the spot, have been granted regular bail and there is no evidence that the applicant was involved in committing the offence. He also added that the applicant will always cooperate with the investigation proceedings and would never abscond from the same. He next submits that since there is an apprehension that the police will arrest the present applicant and thus, he may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the injured submits that the applicant was not present on the spot. Learned State counsel has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is not entitled for any relief. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, it transpires that the applicant was not present on the spot which is evident from the statement of injured; other co-accused, who were present at the place of incident, have been granted regular bail and the applicant has no criminal history and he has undertaken that he will always cooperate with the investigation proceedings and would never abscond from the same, thus this Court finds it to be a fit case for grant of interim anticipatory bail. Accordingly, till the next date of listing, the present applicant-Deependra Kumar Shukla, shall be released forthwith, in case 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:- (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 them 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 chargesheet 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. List/put up this matter in the week commencing 16.01.2025. In the meantime, learned counsel for the State shall file the counter affidavit. "
4. From perusal of the order dated 25.11.2024, it transpires that 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 thorough considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to substantiate that the present applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceedings.
5. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby disposed of while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Deependra Kumar Shukla till disposal of the trial subject to 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 the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.
6. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. Order Date :- 21.1.2025 Mohd. Sharif MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
2. Instant second anticipatory bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the accused-applicant in Case Crime No. 316 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 193(3), 190, 115(2), 109, 61(2), 61(1), 61 of BNS and Section 7 of Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, Police Station Gangaghat, District Unnao.
3. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 25.11.2024 following order was passed, wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "Sri Mayank Dwivedi, Advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama as well as Short Counter Affidavit on behalf of the victim- injured and the same is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mayank Dwivedi, learned counsel for the victim-injured and learned AGA for the State. The instant application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 316 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 193(3), 190, 115(2), 109, 61(2) of BNS and Section 7 of Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, Police Station Gangaghat, District Unnao. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been planted by the police. He further added that the applicant was not present on the spot and this fact has also been verified by the injured of the incident while filing the affidavit before this Court. He next submits that other co-accused persons, who were arrested on the spot, have been granted regular bail and there is no evidence that the applicant was involved in committing the offence. He also added that the applicant will always cooperate with the investigation proceedings and would never abscond from the same. He next submits that since there is an apprehension that the police will arrest the present applicant and thus, he may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the injured submits that the applicant was not present on the spot. Learned State counsel has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is not entitled for any relief. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, it transpires that the applicant was not present on the spot which is evident from the statement of injured; other co-accused, who were present at the place of incident, have been granted regular bail and the applicant has no criminal history and he has undertaken that he will always cooperate with the investigation proceedings and would never abscond from the same, thus this Court finds it to be a fit case for grant of interim anticipatory bail. Accordingly, till the next date of listing, the present applicant-Deependra Kumar Shukla, shall be released forthwith, in case 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:- (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 them 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 chargesheet 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. List/put up this matter in the week commencing 16.01.2025. In the meantime, learned counsel for the State shall file the counter affidavit. "
4. From perusal of the order dated 25.11.2024, it transpires that 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 thorough considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to substantiate that the present applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceedings.
5. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby disposed of while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Deependra Kumar Shukla till disposal of the trial subject to 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 the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.
6. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. Order Date :- 21.1.2025 Mohd. Sharif MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench