Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2025 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. Allahabad High Court/
  4. 2024/
  5. January

Dadhibal Tiwari vs. State of U.p. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.p. Lko. and 2 Others

Decided on 31 January 2024• Citation: /160/2024• Allahabad High Court
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                                           Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:8909
                             Court No. - 15                                       
                             Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL              
                             APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 160 of 2024        
                             Applicant :- Dadhibal Tiwari                         
                             Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P.
                             Lko. And 2 Others                                    
                             Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Pathak,Vijay Pathak  
                             Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.                   
                             Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.                      
                             1. Learned A.G.A. informs that he has procured complete
                             instructions in the matter including up-to-date case diary and
                             the investigation of the case is still pending.      
                             2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned
                             A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.         
                             3. The instant application has been moved by the applicant-
                             Dadhibal Tiwari, in Case Crime No. 353 of 2022, under
                             Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section
                             4/5 Explosive Act, 1884, Police Station Kotwali Ayodhya,
                             District Ayodhya, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory
                             bail, as he is apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.
                             4. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the
                             anticipatory bail application submits that it is a case of false
                             implication. Even if all the contents of the F.I.R. are believed as
                             it is, only an apprehension and suspicion has been shown that
                             the incident has been organized/planned by the applicant.
                             However, the applicant has admittedly not been found on the
                             spot and has not been seen by any alleged eye witness including
                             the informant.                                       
                             5. It is vehemently submitted that during the course of
                             investigation the statement of Mahant of the temple, namely,
                             Ram Sharan Das was recorded, wherein he has stated that in
                             fact it was the informant himself who was planning to
                             dispossess him (Mahant Ram Sharan Das).              
                             6. It is also submitted that apart from suspicion and
                             apprehension, there is nothing on record which may connect the
                             applicant with the crime. He is ready to cooperate in the
                             investigation and would remain present before the investigating
                             officer as and when his presence would be required, moreover,

                             no injury of any kind has been sustained by anyone in the
                             alleged incident.                                    
                             7. It is next submitted that named accused persons of the crime,
                             namely, Mohan Das and Vivek Das have been granted regular
                             bail by a co-ordinate Benches of this Court, vide order dated
                             07.12.2022 and 19.12.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail
                             Application No. 14297 of 2022 and 14847 of 2022.     
                             8. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that having regard
                             to the manner in which the offence has been committed, the
                             applicant is not entitled for any protection.        
                             9. Perusal of the record in the background of submissions made
                             by learned counsel for the parties would reveal that though a
                             suspicion has been shown in the F.I.R. that it is the applicant
                             who has organized/planned the incident. However, no one has
                             claimed to have seen him at the spot. Two accused persons of
                             the crime, namely, Mohan Das and Vivek Das have been 
                             granted the facility of regular bail by a co-ordinate Benches of
                             this Court. The investigating is still going on. The statement of
                             Mahant Ram  Sharan Das recorded during the course of 
                             investigation will also reflect that it is stated by him that in fact
                             it was the informant himself who was making all out efforts to
                             dispossess Mahant Ram Sharan Das from the temple. The
                             applicant is not having any criminal antecedents.    
                             10. Thus, having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the
                             case and for the reasons given herein-before and keeping in
                             view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
                             Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra :
                             (2011) 1 SCC 694, Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi)
                             (2020) 5 SCC 1 and in Nathu Singh Vs. State of U.P. and
                             others':(2021)6 SCC 64, protection from arrest till the
                             submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. may
                             be granted to the applicant.                         
                             11. In result, the anticipatory bail application moved by the
                             applicant- Dadhibal Tiwari is, hereby, disposed of with a
                             direction that till the submission of police report under Section
                             173 (2) Cr.P.C., in the event of arrest of the applicant in the
                             above-mentioned case, he shall be released forthwith on
                             anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.
                             50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the
                             satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station
                             concerned/ Investigating Officer subject to the following
                             conditions:-                                         
                             (1) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation

                             or even for discovery of any fact by a police officer as and
                             when required;                                       
                             (2) 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 them from disclosing such
                             facts to the Court or to any police officer;         
                             (3) The applicant shall not leave the country concerned without
                             the previous permission of the Court.                
                             12. In case of default of any condition the investigating officer
                             may approach this Court for cancellation/modification of this
                             order.                                               
                             13. It is clarified that all the observations contained in this order
                             are only for disposal of this anticipatory bail application and
                             shall not affect the trial proceedings in any manner.
                             Order Date :- 31.1.2024                              
                             Praveen                                              
    DDiiggiittaallllyy ssiiggnneedd bbyy ::--                                     
    PPRRAAVVEEEENN KKUUMMAARR                                                     
    HHiigghh CCoouurrtt ooff JJuuddiiccaattuurree aatt AAllllaahhaabbaadd,,       
    LLuucckknnooww BBeenncchh