Allahabad High Court
Kamruddin vs State Of U.P. And Another on 12 September, 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. - 8596 of 2022
Applicant :- Kamruddin
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Shyam Babu Vaish
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
The present anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail as the accused-applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Case Crime No. 86 of 2022, under Sections 323, 498A, 504 IPC and under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and under Section 3 and 4 of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Gautambuddh Nagar.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence, prima facie, as alleged in the FIR. It is also submitted that the matter relates to matrimonial dispute. Entire case of prosecution is mala fide with intention to harass the applicant, accusation of the applicant is with the object of humiliation. It is also submitted that punishment provided in the said Sections is up to 7 years. Arrest of the applicant is not warranted. Co-accused- Ikbal having similar role has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court on 9.9.2022 in CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8363 of 2022. Therefore, learned counsel for the applicant claims parity. Applicant shall cooperate with the investigation/trial proceeding, therefore, protection may be given in favour of the applicant. In support of his submission, learned counsel for the applicants has relied upon the judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Aman Preet Singh vs. C.B.I. through Director, AIR 2021 Supreme Court 4154.
Learned AGA objected the anticipatory bail application and submitted that apprehension of arrest of the applicant is not based on concrete/reasonable grounds but conceded that the punishment provided for the said offences is up to 7 years, charge sheet has not been filed. Anticipatory bail application lacks merit and is liable to be rejected.
I have considered the rival submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire material available on record.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Aman Preet Singh (Supra), the Court has observed as under:
"10. Insofar as the present case is concerned and the general principles under Section 170 Cr.P.C., the most apposite observations are in sub-para (v) of the High Court judgment in the context of an accused in a non-bailable offence whose custody was not required during the period of investigation. In such a scenario, it is appropriate that the accused is released on bail as the circumstances of his having not been arrested during investigation or not being produced in custody is itself sufficient to entitle him to be released on bail.
11. The rationale has been succinctly set out that if a person has been enlarged and free for many years and has not even been arrested during investigation, to suddenly direct his arrest and to be incarcerated merely because charge sheet has been filed would be contrary to the governing principles for grant of bail. We could not agree more with this."
In Aman Preet Singh (supra), the Court has clearly held that if a person, who is an accused in a non-bailable/cognizable offence, was not taken into custody during the period of investigation, in such a case, it is appropriate that he may be released on bail as the circumstances of his having not been arrested during investigation or not being produced in custody is itself sufficient to entitle him to be released on bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant- Kamruddin be released on bail by the trial Court till conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and, two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned with the following conditions:
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that the applicant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when 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;
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. In case of absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against the applicant under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation;
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his/her presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against the applicant in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code; and
(iv) 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 their bail and proceed against them in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 12.9.2022
Anuj Singh
