PAWAN KUMARDHAR DWIVEDI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. HOME U.P. LKO. AND ANOTHER
NABAIL/629/2025 · 2025-06-09
Rajeev Singh
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 143105 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 143105 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35047 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 629 of 2025 Applicant :- Pawan Kumardhar Dwivedi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home U.P. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vijayendra Prakash Tripathi,Harsh Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 109 of 2025 u/s 191(2), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 333, 109(1), 117(2) of B.N.S., Police Station- Kotwali Ayodhya, District- Ayodhya. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case on the basis of general allegations. He further submits that during the course of investigation, no evidence of loot was found, hence, the relevant sections as regards the offense have already been dropped. He also submits that the applicant is ready to cooperate in the investigation and except the present case, he does not have any criminal antecedent, hence, he is entitled for anticipatory bail. 4. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer of the applicant and submits that active participation of the applicant is found in the incident. He further submits that injury is also found on the body of the injured. He next submits that warrant was also issued as the applicant was not cooperating, and anticipatory bail application of the applicant pending before learned Sessions Judge was rejected on 16.05.2025. 5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the F.I.R. as well as other relevant materials, it is evident that custodial interrogation is not necessary in the case in question. Therefore, the applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail. In case the applicant is taken into custody by Investigating Officer/Investigating Agency, he
shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail after taking personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
(ii) 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) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
6. With above directions, the anticipatory bail application is allowed.
Order Date :- 9.6.2025 Arpan Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench