Allahabad High Court
Asif vs State Of U.P. And Another on 20 May, 2022
Bench: Neeraj Tiwari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3223 of 2022
Applicant :- Asif
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.
This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 571 of 2020, under sections 376-D, 452, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Akbarpur, District- Dehat, during the pendency of investigation.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that real sister of applicant namely Sayma Begam has earlier lodged F.I.R. dated 05.03.2020 against her husband and other family members including husband of complainant. It is next submitted that sister of applicant has lodged F.I.R. on 05.03.2020 whereas complainant Chandni Begam has filed application under section 156(3) dated 11.05.2020 for an incident which took place on 13.03.2020 i.e. after lodging of F.I.R. of sister of applicant. It is next submitted that after investigation, on the basis of call details, final report was submitted, but under the influence of family members of complainant, police has re-investigated the matter and filed charge sheet against the applicant. It is further submitted that date of incident clearly shows that it is nothing but a counter blast case just to pressurize the applicant to withdraw the proceeding initiated by his sister. Apart from that, medical report is also not supported the prosecution case. Applicant has no criminal history. Therefore, he may be granted anticipatory bail.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the said facts.
Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicant, he is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant -Asif involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
(1) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation;
(2) 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; and
(3) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
(4) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(5) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 applicant.
(6) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.
(7) The applicant 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 his bail and proceed against his in accordance with law.
In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 20.5.2022
Sartaj
