SHRIKRISHNA SONI @ BABLOO v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO AND ANOTHER
NABAIL/396/2025 · 2025-05-02
Subhash Vidyarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 137616 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 137616 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:25588 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 396 of 2025 Applicant :- Shrikrishna Soni @ Babloo Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sukh Deo Singh,Paritosh Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1. Heard Sri Sukh Deo Singh, the learned counsel for the applicant, as well as Sri Anand Pratap Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No.0156 of 2025, under Sections 108 and 351(2) B.N.S., lodged at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Sultanpur. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 04.03.2025 against three persons, including the applicant, stating that dead-body of the informant's husband was found at railway-track; a suicide-note was recovered from his pocket wherein he has stated that the named accused persons are responsible for his suicide. 4. The relevant extract of case-diary containing text of the suicide-note has been annexed with the bail application wherein the deceased has stated that the applicant had made him, his family members and friends make investments in property but when he asked for returns on the investments, the applicant used to threaten him. He had borrowed money from his co- brothers (co-accused persons) for making investments and those persons were demanding their money and harassing him
mentally. He was financially hard-pressed and for this reason he was committing suicide. 5. In the affidavit filed in support of bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case, and he has no criminal history. 6. The learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the anticipatory bail application and he has submitted that the deceased has implicated the applicant in the suicide-note left by him and that the investigation is still pending. 7.
Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the only allegation levelled in the suicide-note is of making investments in the property at the persuasion of the applicant and non-return of benefits on the investments; that prima facie it does not appear that the applicant had abetted the deceased for committing suicide and the deceased has committed suicide under mental pressure due to financial difficulties; that the applicant has no criminal history and he has undertaken to cooperate in the investigation as well as in the trial, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant. 8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. In the event of arrest/appearance of applicant- Shrikrishna Soni @ Babloo before the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of S.H.O./Court concerned on the following conditions and subject to any other conditions that may be fixed by the Trial Court: (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 his personal presence is exempted; and (v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)
Order Date :- 2.5.2025 MVS/- Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench