Allahabad High Court
Vijay Pal Singh vs State Of U.P. on 17 August, 2022
Bench: Suresh Kumar Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6704 of 2022
Applicant :- Vijay Pal Singh
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Shukla,Aditya Prakash Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Learned counsel for the applicant has filed affidavit on behalf of the applicant which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
The present anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail as the accused-applicant is apprehending his arrest during trial in connection with Criminal Case No. 2950 of 2020 arising out of Case Crime No. 338 of 2018, under Sections 420, 430, 431, 432 IPC, Police Station Knowledge Park, District Gautam Budh Nagar.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to enmity. It is further submitted that on the misinterpretation of the G.O. dated 16.03.2010, on the behest of the District Magistrate of Gautam Budh Nagar F.I.R. was lodged by Irrigation Officer. It is further submitted that the Division Bench of this Court has already settled this issue by means of Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 70786 of 2011 by allowing the petition and setting aside the restriction on transfer of property by the owners of the land in the area between River Hindan and the embankments constructed by the Irrigation Department. Further submission is that nobody is subsequent purchaser of above land. Further submitted that the investigating officer without collecting the cogent and credible evidence filed the charge-sheet against the applicant and learned Magistrate has taken cognizance in the matter. Further submission is that applicant has explained the criminal history in para 14 of the affidavit. Further submission is that the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant, hence, the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial. In support of his submission, learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Aman Preet Singh vs. C.B.I. through Director, AIR 2021 Supreme Court 4154.
Learned Additional Government Advocate has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail to the applicant and has submitted that during course of investigation charge sheet has been submitted. The offence is serious in nature. Thus, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected.
I have considered the rival submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire material available on record.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Aman Preet Singh (Supra), the Court has observed as under:
"10. Insofar as the present case is concerned and the general principles under Section 170 Cr.P.C., the most apposite observations are in sub-para (v) of the High Court judgment in the context of an accused in a non-bailable offence whose custody was not required during the period of investigation. In such a scenario, it is appropriate that the accused is released on bail as the circumstances of his having not been arrested during investigation or not being produced in custody is itself sufficient to entitle him to be released on bail.
11. The rationale has been succinctly set out that if a person has been enlarged and free for many years and has not even been arrested during investigation, to suddenly direct his arrest and to be incarcerated merely because charge sheet has been filed would be contrary to the governing principles for grant of bail. We could not agree more with this."
In Aman Preet Singh (supra), the Court has clearly held that if a person, who is an accused in a non-bailable/cognizable offence, was not taken into custody during the period of investigation, in such a case, it is appropriate that he may be released on bail as the circumstances of his having not been arrested during investigation or not being produced in custody is itself sufficient to entitle him to be released on bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, particularly seeing the fact that earlier the issue arises in the present application has been settled by the Division Bench of this Court, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant- Vijay Pal Singh be enlarged on anticipatory bail in above case crime number till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and, two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) the applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when 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;
(ii) the applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation;
(iii) in case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code; and
(iv) 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.
With the aforesaid observation/direction, this anticipatory bail application is allowed.
Order Date :- 17.8.2022
Bhanu
