Allahabad High Court
Umakant Singh And 4 Others vs State Of U.P And Another on 22 November, 2022
Bench: Suresh Kumar Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10477 of 2022
Applicant :- Umakant Singh And 4 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Pandey,Shalini Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This is second anticipatory bail application. The first anticipatory bail application of the applicant was rejected for want of prosecution vide order dated 4.8.2022 passed in CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13855 of 2021.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant nos. 1 and 5 have been arrested, therefore, learned counsel for the applicant does not want to press this anticipatory bail application for applicant nos. 1 and 5.
Therefore, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed as not press for applicant nos. 1 and 5.
Learned counsel for the applicant wants to press this application for applicant nos. 2, 3 and 4.
The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant nos. 2, 3 and 4, namely, Chandra Kali, Suman Patel and Kiran Patel with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 0027 of 2021 under Sections 323, 307, 506, 498-A IPC and 3/4 of the D.P. Act, Police Station- Bahariya, District- Prayagraj.
It is contended on behalf of the applicants that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant no. 2 is mother in law. The applicant nos. 3 and 4 are married nanad and they are separately living in their matrimonial house. Earlier the matter was referred to the mediation centre but the mediation could not be successful. General allegation has been made against the applicant nos. 2, 3 and 4.Further submission is that the applicants fully cooperated with the investigation. Hence, the applicants may be enlarged on anticipatory bail and they are ready to cooperate with the trial. If the applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they will never misuse the same. Learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance on a judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.
In the instant case, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.
In the event of arrest the applicants are arrested, they shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case for the aforesaid offences on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. The applicants shall not leave India during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
2. The applicants shall surrender their passports, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. Their passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.
3. 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
4. The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants.
5. In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail, the Trial Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1.
6. The applicants 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 their bail and proceed against them in accordance with law.
The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
Order Date :- 22.11.2022
Anuj Singh
