Allahabad High Court
Sultan And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 4 July, 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. - 2145 of 2022
Applicant :- Sultan And 3 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anurag Upadhyay
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.
Heard Sri Manoj Kumar learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Anurag Upadhyay, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri S.S.Sachan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants - (1) Sultan, (2) Sharmand Khan, (3) Gultan @ Gul Muhammad and (4) Alam with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 257 of 2021, under Sections 354, 427, 452, 323, 504, 506, 34 IPC, Police Station- Nizamabad, District- Azamgarh, during pendency of trial.
It is contended on behalf of the applicants that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to party bandi. He further submitted that the trial court has rejected the anticipatory bail application of the applicant without assigning any reason. The F.I.R. has been lodged by the first informant by means of an application filed under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. after two months of the incident. In the present case charge sheet has been filed by the Investigating Officer without collecting credible and cogent reason. They did not commit any offence as alleged. It is further submitted that they have been implicated in the present due to ulterior motive. The applicants have no criminal antecedent. He further submitted that mother of the applicant no. 2 lodged First Information Report dated 19.1.2022 which was registered as case crime no. 18 of 2022 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452, 427, 354 (Kha) I.P.C. Police Station- Nizamabad, District- Azamgarh against the opposite party no. 2 and his family members. He further submitted that opposite party no. 2 and his family members approached this Court by filing Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application 438 Cr.P.C. 1695 of 2022, which has been finally disposed of vide order dated 16.5.2022 and a copy of the order has been annexed as Annexure SA-2. It is next contended that it is a cross case and there is no evidence regarding involvement of the applicants, however, the Investigating Officer without collecting relevant material submitted the chargesheet which has no basis. Learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance on a judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1.
Learned counsel for the opposite parties vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and their antecedents, the applicants are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case as per the Constitution Bench judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1. The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to the applicants shall also be taken care of as per aforesaid judgement of the Apex Court.
In the event of arrest the applicants are arrested, they shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number for the aforesaid offences 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 applicants shall not leave India during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
2. The applicants shall surrender their passports, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. Their passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.
3. 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
4. The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants.
5. In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail, the Trial Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1.
6. The applicants 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 their bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
The anticipatory bail application is disposed of accordingly.
Order Date :- 4.7.2022
Anuj Singh
