Allahabad High Court
Shrikant Kesarwani vs State Of U.P. on 15 March, 2021
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7866 of 2021
Applicant :- Shrikant Kesarwani
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- In Person
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Sri Dileep Kumar, learned Senior Counsel has put in appearance on behalf of applicant.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Shrikant Kesarwani, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.642 of 2020, under Sections- 147, 148, 149, 427, 395, 504, 323, 506, 307, 325, 354 I.P.C., Police Station- Karchhana, District- Prayagraj, during pendency of trial.
Prior notice of this bail application was served in the office of Government Advocate and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P., hence, this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned A.G.A as per Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. (U.P. Amendment) is not required.
This case was heard in person on 10.3.2021 and the applicant was granted interim protection granting time to the learned A.G.A. to obtain instructions.
Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the injuries found on the person of the injured were examined by the doctor on 28.12.2020 at 11:08 hours at C.H.C., Karchhana, Prayagraj. Four injuries were found. The injured was referred to S.R.N. Hospital, Prayagraj, where the doctor found the injury suffered by the injured to be one day old. He has submitted that the F.I.R. was lodged on the very date of incident i.e. 28.12.2020 at 18:24 hours and the examination of the injuries has also been done on the same date. If the injuries were one day old then the allegations in the F.I.R. are not correct. He has pointed out to the relevant part of the case diary dated 1.1.2021, wherein the aforesaid facts have been mentioned. The case diary has been produced by the learned A.G.A.
Further submission of the learned Senior Counsel is that the statement of the informant was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and the Investigating Officer asked him that in the F.I.R., there is allegation that his boundary wall was broken by J.C.B. machine, but there is no trace of any bricks or digging of the land on the spot by J.C.B. machine, as alleged in the F.I.R., then the informant could not give any satisfactory answer. The Investigating Officer found new bricks and sand on the spot. The independent witnesses have stated that the allegation regarding snatching of mobile and gold chain in the F.I.R. levelled against the applicant is not correct. He has stressed upon the fact that there was prior enmity between the parties and after the son of the informant suffered injuries somewhere one day ago, a false F.I.R. was lodged to falsely implicate the applicant and other accused persons in this case. The Investigating Officer has also found that from the villagers he came to know that land in dispute has been recorded in the name of the accused persons and there is long dispute between the parties regarding the same.
Learned Senior Counsel has submitted that the informant wants to grab the land of the applicant and make his road and gate over the same, and therefore, he has been falsely implicated him in this case. He has submitted that it is a case of false implication.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the arguments advanced on behalf of applicant and has submitted that the allegation in the F.I.R. are correct, but has not been able to controvert the submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel relying upon the case diary produced by learned A.G.A.
Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicant, he is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
2. The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
3. 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 her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
4. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant.
5. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.
6. The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court, default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
7. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
8. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 15.3.2021
Anil K. Sharma
