VIMLESH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ITS PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. HOME CIVIL SECRETARIAT LKO. AND ANOTHER
NABAIL/123/2025 · 2025-05-05
Manish Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 122085 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 122085 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 123 of 2025 Applicant :- Vimlesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secretariat Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prateek Tewari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Tripathi Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of opposite party no.1-State and Mr. Alok Singh, Advocate holding brief on behalf of Mr. Anil Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for informant.
2. First Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with regard to Case Crime no.841 of 2024, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 447, 120-B IPC and Section 3 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, registered at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda.
3. As per contents of first information report, main gist of allegation is levelled against co-accused Brijesh Kumar Awasthi who is said to have constructed a residential accommodation on nazul property which was subsequently transferred in the name of one Chandani who is also a co- accused. FIR also indicates a collusive suit having been filed by the said Chandani in which applicant alongwith Brijesh Kumar Awasthi is indicated as defendant in Misc. Case No.55 of 2023.
4. It has been submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in charges levelled against him/her which could be evident from fact that there is no specific allegation levelled against applicant either of having encroached upon nazul land or even being a vendor or vendee of the alleged sale-deed dated 05.01.2024. It is submitted that charge-sheet has not yet been filed and applicant is cooperating in the investigation. It is submitted that previous criminal history of applicant has been explained and he has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in other connected matters.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate has
opposed anticipatory bail but does not dispute the fact that investigation against applicant is still ongoing in which he is cooperating. Learned counsel for informant has opposed anticipatory bail with the submission that the applicant is a part of the gang which initiates fabricated sale- deeds in order to usurp the property.
6. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by
learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, prima facie, it appears that primary gist of allegations have been levelled against co- accused Brijesh Kumar Awasthi and Chandani with no specific allegation being levelled against applicant. It is admitted that applicant's previous criminal history has been explained and he is cooperating in investigation. Thus, in view of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1, it would be appropriate to grant interim anticipatory bail to applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C./482 BNSS.
7. In view of above, it is provided that till filing of police report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C./193 BNSS in the event of arrest, applicant- Vimlesh shall be released on interim anticipatory bail in aforesaid Case Crime number on his/her furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned with the following conditions:- (i) That the accused-applicant shall make himself/herself available for interrogation by police authorities as and when required and will cooperate with the investigation; (ii) That the accused-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/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) That the accused-applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.
(iv) In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this order.
8. The application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 5.5.2025 Subodh/- Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench