Allahabad High Court
Rahul And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. on 1 December, 2022
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12047 of 2022
Applicant :- Rahul And 3 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlendra Tripathi,Devesh Kumar Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Heard Sri Devesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri P.K. Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 66 of 2022, under Section 307 IPC, Police Station- Mahuwa Kheda, District- Aligarh, with the prayer to enlarge the applicants on anticipatory bail.
The present FIR was lodged under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 506 IPC and the applicants were enlarged on regular bail vide order dated 1.4.2022 by the court C.J.M. Aligarh. Learned counsel has stated that later on, the investigating officer added Section 307 IPC also. Learned counsel has argued that said sections have been added just to frustrate the case of the applicants, so that they may be sent behind the bars. Learned counsel has stated that once the applicants have been admitted to bail and there is nothing on record to suggest that they have misused it or have committed any other offence, then they may be enlarged on bail in the added Sections under the provisions of 438 Cr.P.C. He has further stated that the applicants do not have any criminal antecedents to their credit. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicants to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against them. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicants have also been touched upon at length. It is further stated that applicants are co-operating in the trial and are ready to cooperate in future also.
Learned Counsel has placed much reliance on the judgments of the Apex Court passed in case of Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth vs. State of Gujarat & Another reported in 2016 (1) SCC (Cri) 240 and Manoj Suresh Jadhav & Ors. vs. The State of Maharashtra, reported in 2018 SCC OnLine SC 3428, wherein the applicant therein was enlarged on anticipatory bail in the added sections U/S 438 Cr.P.C. after being enlarged on regular bail U/S 439 Cr.P.C. Learned Counsel has also placed reliance on the judgment of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.9742 of 2021, wherein the accused was enlarged on anticipatory bail after being granted regular bail.
Per contra, the prayer for anticipatory bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, he could not dispute the said facts advanced by learned Counsel for the applicants.
It is true that the applicants were enlarged on bail in the said F.I.R. and they have not misused it during investigation and no apprehension of tampering with evidence has been raised by the A.G.A. Sending the applicants behind bars again in the added sections would be of no fruitful use.
On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants, the case law produced by learned counsel for applicants, and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-(2020) 5 SCC 1", the applicants are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to the applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgement of the Apex Court.
In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. In the event of arrest, let the accused-applicants Rahul, Kuldeep, Dilip and Prithvi Singh, be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
2. that 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
3. that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
4. that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant;
5. that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
6. that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
7. that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial or deciding the regular bail application.
Order Date :- 1.12.2022
Shalini
