Vineet Tyagi And Another vs State Of U.P And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 6449 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 73
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4507 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Vineet Tyagi And Another
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Tiwari,R.K.Paramhans Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Gaurav Kumar Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the applicants (Vineet Tyagi and Vivek Tyagi) apprehending their arrest in Case Crime No.85 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 & 506 I.P.C., and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Niwadi, District-Ghaziabad.

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the present applicants have been falsely implicated in this case as they have not committed any offence as alleged in the procession story so narrated in the First Information Report (in short F.I.R.).

Learned counsel for the applicants has further submitted that the present applicants are father-in-law and brother-in-law (Devar) of the victim.

The attention has been drawn towards the F.I.R. which has been lodged under Sections 498-A, 323, 377, 376, 511, 354, 354-B, 354-D, 504, 506 and 120-B I.P.C. read with Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act but after conclusion of the investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed only under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 & 506 I.P.C. read with Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

Further attention of this Court has been drawn towards Annexure No.2 of the application, which is anticipatory bail order dated 11.05.2022 passed in favour of the applicant No.2. He has also submitted that the same order has been passed in favour of applicant No.1, however, such order could not be enclosed with this application. He has further submitted that the aforesaid order was passed before filing of the charge-sheet.

He has further submitted that after filing of the charge-sheet, the applicant has assailed the aforesaid charge-sheet by filing application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. bearing Application (U/S 482 Cr.P.C.) No.674 of 2022, which was dismissed vide order dated 02.02.2022. However, this Curt had directed the applicants to surrender before the court below and apply for bail with further direction that the same shall be decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

As per learned counsel for the applicants, in compliance of the aforesaid order, instead of filing regular bail application the present applicants had filed anticipatory bail before the learned court below, which was rejected vide order dated 06.05.2022. In such rejection order, the learned court below has noted that since the charge-sheet has been filed under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 & 506 I.P.C. read with Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and the matter is pending before the learned trial court, therefore, there is no apprehension of arrest of the present applicants and the applicants shall abide by further orders of the learned trial court.

Therefore, learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that however the learned court below has observed that there is no apprehension of arrest of the present applicants but the learned court below has issued the non-bailable warrant against them, so their liberty may be protected and the applicants undertake that they shall co-operate with the investigation.

Per contra, learned counsel for the informant/ complainant has drawn attention of this Court towards the order dated 19.05.2022 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad dismissing the revision of the present applicants which was filed against non-bailable warrant observing that the revisionist appears before the learned court below and moves an application for cancellation of non-bailable warrant, the learned court court shall consider such application strictly in accordance with law as well as in the light of the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in re: Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI & Anr. passed in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).5191/2021.

He has further submitted that till date the present applicants have not filed any such application. He has also submitted that the present applicants have not followed the directions of learned court below, therefore, this Court while disposing of the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. directed them to surrender before the learned court below. Neither the applicants have surrendered before the learned court below nor they have filed any application for cancellation of non-bailable warrant.

As per learned counsel for the complainant/ informant the directions of court of law must be abide by its letter and spirit by the applicants.

Learned Additional Government Advocate has also opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the present applicants.

Be that as it may, since this Court vide order dated 02.02.2022 passed in the application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. directed the applicants to surrender before the learned court below and apply for bail, but such direction has not been followed by the applicants, therefore, the order of anticipatory bail may not be granted to the present applicants. Besides, the present applicants have not filed any appropriate application before the learned court below for cancellation of non-bailable warrant in terms of order dated 19.05.2022 passed by the revisional Court (Session Court), therefore, it is again non-compliance of the direction of the revisional court (Session Court). Besides, the learned Session Court while dismissing the anticipatory bail of the present applicants vide order dated 06.05.2022 has observed that the sections under which the charge-sheet has been filed, there may not be any apprehension of arrest of the applicants.

The anticipatory bail application is invariably allowed in a case where there is apprehension of arrest in a non-bailable offence and if the accused applicants have got his/ their prima-facie case, but in the present case, had the present applicants appeared before the learned court below by filing regular bail application, their bail application would have been disposed of finally and there would have not been issued non-bailable warrant. The non-bailable warrant has been issued by the learned court below for the reason that the present applicants have not appeared before the learned court below.

In view of the above, I do not find any good ground to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicants but it is observed that if the present applicants appear before the learned court below by filing appropriate application for cancellation of non-bailable warrant and application for regular bail within a period of ten days from today, the same may be disposed of with expedition, preferably, on the same day, strictly in accordance with law as well as in the light of the dictum of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in re:Satender Kumar Antil (supra).

Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application is disposed of finally.

However, it is provided that till filing of such application or till the period of ten days, whichever is earlier, the present applicants may not be taken into custody.

Order Date :- 11.7.2022 [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

Suresh