Allahabad High Court
Mohsin And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 12 April, 2022
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Pachori
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1620 of 2022
Applicant :- Mohsin And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Amar Jeet Upadhyay
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
Heard Sri Amar Jeet Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicants- Mohsin and Smt. Shamim under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to release them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.392 of 2021 for offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 323 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at Police Station- Mundali, District- Meerut, during pendency of the trial, after rejecting the anticipatory bail application of the applicants by Special Judge (POCSO), Court No.3/ Additional District & Session Judge, Meerut vide order dated 27.01.2022.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. As per the allegations of first information report marriage of the victim was solemnized with applicant no.1 and applicant no.2 is mother-in-law and seven other family members of the applicant no.1 with general allegation of demand of dowry for bring cash from her parental house and the general role of mar-pit. The applicants have no criminal history and they are not convicted in any cognizable offence.
Learned counsel for the applicants relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand, (2010) 7 SCC 667, where it was held that the courts have to be extremely careful and cautious in dealing with these complaints and must take pragmatic realities into consideration while dealing with matrimonial cases. The allegation of the complaint are required to be scrutinized with great care and circumspection.
The applicants are no more required for custodial interrogation. The applicants have no criminal history and they have not undergone any imprisonment after conviction by any court of law in relation to any cognizable offence previously. It is further contended that the applicants are ready to participate in the investigation. The applicants were granted interim anticipatory bail by this court vide order dated 08.03.2022.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicants, however, nothing adverse has been pointed out against the applicants.
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 Vs. 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.
It is settled position of law that the anticipatory bail being an extraordinary privilege should be granted only in exceptional cases. Parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offence are required to be satisfied, where the Court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has falsely roped in the crime and would not misuse his liberty.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98, ground for grant of ad interim anticipatory bail is made out.
In case of arrest, the applicants, Mohsin and Smt. Shamim are directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in above case crime number till the conclusion of trial, on their furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two sureties each of like amount before the Station House Officer of Police Station/Court concerned with the following conditions:
(i) The applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required, if investigation is in progress;
(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 such person from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iii) The applicants shall not leave the country 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/Court concerned;
(iv) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant along-with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked;
(v) 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.
The Investigating Officer will continue with the investigation, if it is in progress and will not be affected by this order.
A copy of this order shall also be produced before the S.P/S.S.P concerned by the applicants, within a week, if the investigation is still in progress, who shall ensure compliance of this order.
With the aforesaid directions, the present Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed.
Order Date :- 12.4.2022
Ishan
