Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 132869 (ALL)

GYAN PRAKASH TIWARI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME AND ANOTHER

ABAIL/389/2025 · 2025-04-11

Manish Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 389 of 2025 Applicant :- Gyan Prakash Tiwari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mayank Pandey,Akhilesha Nand Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record. 2. In view of order being passed, notice to opposite party no.2 stands dispensed with. 3. This first anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.329 of 2023, under Sections 354 Gha IPC read with Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, P.S. Rajeshultanpur, District Ambedkar Nagar. 4. As per contents of FIR, the family of the informant and applicant have a long running enmity and due to same, the alleged incident has taken place on 12.10.2023 at about 7.30 a.m when co-accused Ashwani was caught recording a video while the applicant's sister was taking a bath. 5. It is submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him and even from a bare narration of FIR, no provision under Sections 354 (c) and (d) IPC would be made out against the applicant. It is further submitted that even otherwise the maximum punishment is of three years but charge sheet has already been filed. It is also submitted that previous criminal history of the applicant has already been explained. 6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application with the submission that first anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant was rejected by the trial court which was not challenged and subsequently second anticipatory bail application was also rejected by the trial court on the ground that no new ground has been indicated by the applicant. It is also submitted that the applicant has also approached this Court earlier in Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C bearing No.5260 of 2024 which was dismissed as withdrawn granting liberty to the applicant and co-accused to file discharge application through their counsel. It is also submitted that non bailable warrant has been issued against the applicant. 7. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, it appears that main gist of allegation has been levelled against co-accused Ashwani pertaining to sections 354 Ga and 354 Gha IPC. It is also admitted that previous criminal history of the applicant has already been explained and even if the sections are made out the maximum punishment is of three years. Charge sheet has already been filed against the applicant. 8. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the that the liberty of the applicant may be protected in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98. 9. In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant- Gyan Prakash Tiwari shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid Case Crime number on his 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) 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 tamper with the evidence; (ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail; 10. Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed. 11. The application stands allowed. Order Date :- 11.4.2025 Renu/- Digitally signed by :- RENU AGARWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench