Allahabad High Court
Sachin Soni vs Union Of India Thru. Cbi/Scb Lko. on 13 June, 2022
Bench: Abdul Moin
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 11
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 893 of 2022
Applicant :- Sachin Soni
Opposite Party :- Union Of India Thru. Cbi/Scb Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Shailesh Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anurag Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Akhilendra Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the CBI.
The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Criminal Case No.341 of 2022, FIR/Crime No. RC 053 2021 S 0002 of 2021 registered under Sections 120B, 409, 418, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 477A IPC and Sections 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 at Police Station- CBI/SCB/Lucknow, District Lucknow with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant was enlarged on bail in the present subject matter vide order dated 24.04.2018 passed by this Court. The charge-sheet has been filed at Police Station Civil Lines, Prayagraj against the applicant by the local police. The investigation was later on handed over to the CBI and again a charge-sheet has been filed by the CBI in court under Sections 120B, 409, 418, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 477A IPC and Sections 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that he has not misused the liberty of bail accorded to him vide order dated 24.04.2018 and there is no likelihood of him absconding. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There is no criminal history of the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he will cooperate in the trial failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
Per contra, Sri Akhilendra Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the CBI has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but could not dispute the fact that the applicant had already been enlarged on bail vide order dated 24.04.2018.
On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and Others vs. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 656". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Sachin Soni be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
2. that the applicant 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 applicant 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 applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
6. that the applicant 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 :- 13.6.2022/J.K. Dinkar
