SHIVAM YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. HOME LKO.
ABAIL/2775/2024 · 2025-02-17
Shree Prakash Singh
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 170054 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 170054 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10518 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2775 of 2024 Applicant :- Shivam Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Singh 'Raghuvanshi' Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 117 of 2024, under Sections 380, 457, 411 IPC, Police Station Dhammaur, District Sultanpur. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 18.12.2024, the following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:-
"Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 117 of 2024, under sections 380, 457 and 411 of IPC P.S.- Dhammaur District -Sultanpur. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been planted by the police in the instant matter. He submits that the applicant is not named in the first information report and the police under suspicion is trying to arrest the applicant though, there is no cogent piece of evidence against him. He also submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history as is mentioned in paragraph no. 14 of the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail application and after lodging of the present FIR, the applicant has also moved a bail application which is in docket today. He next submits that the applicant has always cooperated with the investigation proceedings and undertakes that he would never abscond from the same. He also submits that there is acute apprehension that the applicant will be arrested by the police thus, submission is that the the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the submissions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is involved in committed offence, as such, he is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, till the next date of listing, the present applicant- Shivam Yadav shall be released forthwith, in case of his arrest in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (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 in case chargesheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. List/put up this matter in fourth week of January, 2025. In the meantime, the State may file counter affidavit." From perusal of the order dated 18.12.2024, it transpires that State counsel has failed to demonstrate that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on an interim anticipatory bail after thoroughly considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceeding or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Shivam Yadav till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (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 personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this protection.
Order Date :- 17.2.2025 kkv/ Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench