Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Ravindra Maithani, J.
Mahant Satyanand - Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand - Respondent
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 44 of 2023
Decided On : 20-01-2023
Anticipatory Bail - Threatening - The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant based on the similarity of his role to a co-accused who had already been granted anticipatory bail, and the view that the case was fit for anticipatory bail.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant sought anticipatory bail in a case where he was accused of threatening the Sadhu Sant of Panchayati Akhada Bada Udaseen. The FIR detailed the threats made by unknown persons to the informant near Ganges.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the applicant's role was similar to a co-accused who had already been granted anticipatory bail, and that the case was fit for anticipatory bail. The court granted the anticipatory bail with certain conditions.
Issues: The issues involved the applicant's request for anticipatory bail in a case involving threats to the Sadhu Sant of Panchayati Akhada Bada Udaseen.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the similarity of the applicant's role to a co-accused who had been granted anticipatory bail, and the view that the case was fit for anticipatory bail.
Final Decision: The court allowed the anticipatory bail application and ordered the release of the applicant on anticipatory bail with specific conditions.
JUDGMENT
Ravindra Maithani, J. - Applicant Mahant Satyanand has sought anticipatory bail in FIR No.397 of 2022, under Sections 384, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Kankhal, District Haridwar. He has sought his release on anticipatory bail.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. According to the FIR, the applicant is threatening the Sadhu Sant of Panchayati Akhada Bada Udaseen ('the Akhada'). The FIR records details of such acts. According to it, on 23.11.2022 at 02:30, when the informant was offering prayers near Ganges, some unknown persons threatened him to life that in case any action against the applicant and others. Those persons had masked them.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that, in fact, the co-accused Mahant Vanshi Das had already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court on 12.01.2023; the custodial interrogation of the applicant would not serve any purpose; the role of the applicant is similar to the co-accused, who has already been granted anticipatory bail.
5. Learned State counsel would submit that the State may not like to file any objection in it because the role of the applicant is not dissimilar to the co-accused, who had already been granted anticipatory bail.
6. Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for anticipatory bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
7. The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant be released on anticipatory bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. In addition to it, the applicant shall also comply with the following conditions:
(i) The applicant shall co-operate with the investigation.
(ii) The applicant shall not approach any witness/victim in any manner, whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the concerned court.
(iv) The applicant shall deposit his passport with the Investigating Officer. The passport may only be returned by the order of the court concerned. In case, if he does not have passport, he shall give an undertaking to that effect to the Investigating Officer.
(v) The applicant shall also give an undertaking on (i), (ii) & (iii) above.
The court considered the similarity of the applicant's role to a co-accused who had been granted anticipatory bail as a key factor in granting anticipatory bail.
The main legal point established is that anticipatory bail can be granted based on the absence of direct involvement of the applicant in the alleged offense.
The court established that the issuance of non-bailable warrants and proceedings under Section 82 of the Code negate the entitlement to anticipatory bail.
Grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. based on the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced at the bar.
The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicants, emphasizing the need for cooperation with the investigation and restrictions on witness contact.
Anticipatory bail can be granted when there is no recovery from the applicants and co-accused with similar roles have been granted bail, provided conditions are imposed to ensure compliance with the ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of the nature of allegations, absence of the accused at the site of the incident, and the legal principles laid down by the Hon’b....
Grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. based on the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments presented.
The court may grant anticipatory bail considering the compromise arrived at between the parties and the facts and circumstances of the case.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
