Allahabad High Court
Manan Aggarwal vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 2 November, 2022
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?
Court No. - 11
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 228 of 2022
Applicant :- Manan Aggarwal
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And 2 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Amarjeet Singh Rakhra,Bashisth Muni Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.
This Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been moved by the applicant after rejecting his anticipatory bail application by the order dated 20.01.2022 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Unnao, seeking Anticipatory Bail in Case Crime No. 0459 of 2021, under Sections 406, 420, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Ajgain, District Unnao, during the pendency of the investigation.
On 14.03.2022, following order was passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court :-
"Heard Sri Amarjeet Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material available on record.
The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 0459 of 2021, under Sections 406, 420, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Ajgain, District Unnao, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant is the Senior Vice-President Marketing in the company. He has further submitted that similarly placed co-accused person, Lalit Kumar, who is the Senior Manager, Marketing, has already been granted anticipatory bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.2.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 226 of 2022. Therefore, the present applicant is also entitled for anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he 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.
Matter requires consideration.
Three weeks' time is granted to learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the first informant to file counter affidavit.
One week's time, thereafter, is granted to learned counsel for the applicant for filing rejoinder affidavit.
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, as an interim measure, 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 the event of arrest, the accused-applicant- Manan Aggarwal shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 2,00,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned on the following conditions:-
(i) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation as and when required;
(ii) 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
(iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.
List this case on 25th April, 2022 in the additional cause list."
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that factual submission advanced on behalf of the applicant as recorded in the order dated 14.03.2022 has not been disputed by the State in the counter affidavit. It is also submitted that interim anticipatory bail has already been granted to the applicant during pendency of this application vide order dated 14.03.2022 and the applicant has not misused the said liberty, therefore, aforesaid interim order dated 14.03.2022 may be made absolute till submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. on the same terms and conditions as indicated in the order dated 14.03.2022.
Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that regarding the offences which are punishable upto 7 years or less imprisonment, there is no apprehension of being arrested, hence the instant anticipatory bail application is not maintainable.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the fact that the alleged offences against the applicant are punishable not more than 7 years of imprisonment, the instant anticipatory bail application is disposed of with direction to the investigating officer of this case that if the offences being investigated against the applicant are punishable with 7 years or less imprisonment, the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 shall be complied with in letter and spirit.
Order Date :- 2.11.2022
Shubham
