Allahabad High Court
Satish Chandra Yadav And Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief ... on 18 May, 2022
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 28
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 654 of 2022
Applicant :- Satish Chandra Yadav And Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Lko
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Mansoor,Devendra Upadhyay,Mohammad Danish
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Heard Sri Mohd. Mansoor, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in F.I.R. No. 0162 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 307, 332, 353, 336, 427, 171-F, 34, 188 and 269 I.P.C., Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932, Section 51 of Disaster Management Act, 2005, Sections 131, 132(3) and 135A of Representation of Peoples Act 1950, 1951 and 1989, Sections 2 and 3 of Prevention of Damage of Public Property Act, 1984 and Section 3(1) of The Epidemic Diseases (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020, at Police Station- Aaspur Devsara, District Pratapgarh, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that has submitted that the case of the applicants is at par with that of the co-accused person, Ravindar @ Ravindra Kumar, Ram Tirath Yadav @ Ramjanak Yadav, Vivin Kumar Yadav and Pankaj Kumar Yadav, who have already been granted anticipatory bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.4.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 13041 of 2021. Therefore, the present applicants are also entitled for anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the applicants has further submitted that the applicants have no criminal history. Learned counsel for the applicants undertake that applicants will cooperate in the investigation failing which the State can move appropriate application for vacation of the interim protection.
The prayer for anticipatory bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by him.
On due consideration to the arguments advance by learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants, the applicants, as an interim measure, are liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail on the ground of parity and in view of the Constitution Bench judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicants 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 applicants is allowed.
In the event of arrest, let the accused-applicants- Satish Chandra Yadav, Kuldeep Kumar Yadav, Pankaj Yadav, Sunil Kumar Yadav, Ramhit Nishad, Onkar Yadav, Shyam Bahadur Yadav, Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, Ramashankar Yadav, Pramod Kumar Yadav, Brajesh Yadav, Sandeep Kumar Yadav, Anil Kumar Gupta and Rajesh @ Lavkesh Sharma, be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on bail on furnishing a personal bond and 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 applicants;
5. that the investigating officer is directed to conclude the investigation in the present case in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably, within a period of four months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order independently without being prejudiced by any observation made by this court while considering or deciding the present bail application of the applicants;
6. that the applicants are directed to produce certified copy of this order before the SSP/SP concerned within 10 days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of the present order;
7. that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
8. that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
9. that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
10. 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 :- 18.5.2022
Shalini
