Vishram Singh vs State Of U.P.
2022 Latest Caselaw 12794 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 72
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11724 of 2021
 

 
Applicant :- Vishram Singh
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J. 

At the very outset, learned counsel for applicant states that in similar identical matters, this Court has earlier granted protection to the applicant till conclusion of trial vide order dated 28.07.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.6319 of 2022 (Reena Yadav vs. State of U.P.), hence, the applicant is also entitled for the same relief.

The assertions made on behalf of applicant is not disputed by learned Additional Government Advocate appears for the State.

In view of the above, the present anticipatory bail application is also allowed in terms of the order dated 28.07.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.6319 of 2022 (Reena Yadav vs. State of U.P.).

Let the applicant-Vishram Singh, be released on bail by the trial court in Case Crime No.0106 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 409 IPC Police Station Jasrana, District Firozabad on furnishing a personal bond and, two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned with the following conditions:

(1) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation.

(2) 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.

(3) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

(4) The applicant shall surrender her passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.

(5) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant.

(6) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

(7) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against his in accordance with law.

In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

With the aforesaid directions/observations, the present anticipatory bail application is allowed.

Order Date :- 13.9.2022

Ajeet