Allahabad High Court
Parvez Shahjahan And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. on 17 May, 2022
Bench: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2397 of 2022
Applicant :- Parvez Shahjahan And 3 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- M J Akhtar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shadab Alam
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
Heard Shri V.M. Zaidi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri M.J. Akhtar, learned counsel for applicants, Shri Shadab Alam, learned counsel for complainant and Shri K.P. Pathak, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the record.
Initially, after investigation, charge sheet was filed against five persons including applicants in connection with Case Crime No.88 of 2020, under Sections 336, 323, 504, 506, 147, 308 and 452 IPC wherein applicants surrendered and applied for regular bail which was granted by an order dated 7.8.2020 with certain conditions.
Shri V.M. Zaidi, learned Senior Advocate for applicants submits that on the basis of informant's application, further investigation was conducted and thereafter, supplementary charge sheet was filed adding grievous sections (147, 308 and 452 IPC) against all accused persons on which cognizance was taken and summons were issued. Learned Senior counsel further submits that applicants approached the Trial Court by filing anticipatory bail on the ground as they were not arrested during investigation and were granted regular bail but belatedly other sections were added and therefore, anticipatory bail application be allowed. However, the said application was rejected by an order dated 22.2.2022. Learned Senior Counsel has relied upon a judgment passed in Manoj Suresh Jadhav and others vs. State of Maharashtra; 2018 SCC Online SC 3428 as well as judgment passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Application u/s 10136 of 2021 (Rajesh @ Nathu and others vs. State of U.P. and another), decided on 6.12.2021 and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.23187 of 2020 (Arif vs. State of U.P.), decided on 27.8.2020 wherein Manoj Suresh Yadav (Supra) was followed that in case accused person has already been admitted to bail and thereafter certain sections are added, it is not necessary that accused persons to be arrested and to apply for bail.
Shri K.P. Pathak, learned A.G.A for State and Shri Shadab Alam, learned counsel for complainant have opposed the aforesaid submission. However, they have not able to dispute position of law as referred in the above referred judgments.
In view of above referred factual and legal aspect of case, I found merit in submission of learned Senior counsel for applicants that since applicants were already granted regular bail in pursuance of charge sheet filed at the first instance, therefore, due to submission of a supplementary charge whereby certain offences are added (Section 147, 308 & 452 IPC), there is no need for them to surrender and thereafter file an application for bail. Learned Senior counsel has submitted that applicants undertake to appear before the Trial Court as and when required and they will adhere to the directions issued by Trial Court.
In view of above, though according to the procedure prescribed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. at the first instance, interim anticipatory bail could be granted to the applicants, however, considering that I have heard learned counsel for respondents who have received complete instructions, therefore, it is directed that applicants shall co-operate with the trial and in the event of arrest, applicants be released on bail in connection with aforesaid case so far as added Section (147, 308 and 452) is concerned in above referred case, with following conditions :-
1) The applicants shall furnish a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned.
2) The applicants shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any prosecution witness;
3) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;
4) 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.
In view of above, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 17.5.2022
Rishabh
[Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.]
