SANKATMOCHAN @ SANKAT MOCHAN SHUKLA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. DEPTT. OF HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER
ABAIL/649/2025 · 2025-06-13
Rajeev Singh
Criminal Appealbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 145304 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 145304 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35436 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 649 of 2025 Applicant :- Sankatmochan @ Sankat Mochan Shukla Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Bhanu Pratap Singhbisen 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 grant him anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 10 of 2023 u/s 354 I.P.C., Police Station- Baundi, District- Bahraich. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicant cooperated in the investigation and he was not taken into custody during the course of investigation. He next submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted and no custodial trial is necessary. Relying on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in the case of Siddharth vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. reported in Criminal Appeal No.838 of 2021 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.5442/2021), learned counsel for the applicant lastly submits that the applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail. 4. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer of the applicant and submits that sufficient evidence has been found against the applicant. However, he does not dispute the fact that the applicant was not taken into custody during the course of investigation and there is no evidence that he misused the liberty given by the Investigating Officer. 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 the applicant was not taken into custody during the course of investigation and he cooperated in the investigation. As the charge-sheet has already been submitted, custodial trial is not necessary. Thus, 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./351 B.N.S.S. 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 :- 13.6.2025 Arpan Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench