Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 77575 (ALL)

ARBAZ AND 2 OTHERS v. State of UP AND ANOTHER

ABAIL/7389/2024 · 2025-03-17

Vivek Varma

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:38660 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7389 of 2024 Applicant :- Arbaz And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kushagra Srivastava,Shahrukh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ashish Tyagi,G.A.,Kapil Tyagi Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Ashish Tyagi, counsel for the informant. Perused the material placed on record. 2. This application under section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.204 of 2024, under sections 452, 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C., P.S. Hapur Dehat, District Hapur. 3. Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the instant case. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 21.6.2024. The first information report has been lodged on 26.6.2024. The delay is fatal to the prosecution case. As per the allegations in the first information report, the applicants have assaulted the injured by lathi and danda. The injured received injuries on his head and other parts of the body. The applicant no. 2 also received injuries in the alleged incident. At this stage there is no clarity with regard to the role of the applicants. The maximum sentence provided for the alleged offences is upto seven years. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. It is next submitted that the investigation is going on and the applicants have apprehension of their arrest in the above mentioned case. 4. Learned A.G.A. for the State and counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that the application for grant of anticipatory bail be confined only till the submission of police report. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants, the fact that the applicant no. 2 has also received injuries in the alleged incident, at this stage there is no clarity with regard to the role of the applicants, the fact that the maximum sentence provided for the alleged offences is upto seven years, at this stage there is no substantive evidence to link the applicants with the offence, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report. 7. In the event of arrest, the applicants Arbaz, Sonu and Abdul Kadir be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) The applicants 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned. 8. In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants. 9. The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudiced by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant. 10. The applicants are directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order. 11. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 18.3.2025 S.S. Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad