Allahabad High Court
Om Singh vs C.B.I. Lko. on 25 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. - 12222 of 2021
Applicant :- Om Singh
Opposite Party :- C.B.I. Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajit Singh,S.N. Singh Gaherwar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anurag Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Heard Sri S.N. Singh Gaherwar, learned counsel for the applicant and 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 applicant in Criminal Misc. Case No.426 of 2016, Case Crime No./R.C. No. 00062015A0003 registered under Sections 120B, 409, 420, 468, 471, 477A, 201 IPC, Sections 13(2) r/w 13(1)(C) & (D) of PC Act, 1988 and Sections 65 and 66 of I.T. Act at Police Station- CBI/ACB, District Lucknow with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that co-accused person, Virendra Singh, has already been granted anticipatory bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.10.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.10949 of 2021. Therefore, the present applicant is also entitled for anticipatory bail on the ground of parity. 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 the anticipatory bail.
The prayer for anticipatory bail has been vehemently opposed by Sri Akhil Pratap Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the CBI. 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 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 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 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- Om Singh 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 in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
6. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
7. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
8. 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 :- 25.5.2022
Ravi Kant
