Allahabad High Court
Ravindra Pratap Singh vs State Of U.P. And Another on 27 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. - 7522 of 2022
Applicant :- Ravindra Pratap Singh
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Chandra Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Heard Ms. Preeti Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ramesh Chandra Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant-Ravindra Pratap Singh with a prayer to release on bail in Case Crime No. 28 of 2022, under Sections 379, 411 IPC and under Section 4/21 Khan and Khanij Adhiniyam, Police Station- Kadaura, District- Jalaun.
It is contended on behalf of the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case.He further submitted that the applicant is driver of truck no. UP41 AT 1198 and it is alleged in the first information report that on 6.3.2022 31 trucks were apprehended by the informant who is Mines Inspector of District-Jalaun. The allegation is that the trucks were loaded with sand/moram without any valid papers, Ravanna etc. and thus they were committing theft and revenue loss to the Government. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant got loaded the sand/moram on his truck in the anticipation that when he will receive Form-11 from mines department then he will move to the destination but in the meantime the Mines Inspector/Informant with the help of local police came on spot and due to fear the applicant ran away. He further submitted that no disclosed offence is made out against the applicant under Section 379, 411 I.P.C.
He further submitted that if any offence is made out against the applicant, the same is not beyond the preview of Section 4/21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation)Act, 1957 (in short "Mines Act"). It is also submitted that as per Section 22 of the Mines Act, no court shall take cognizance except upon complaint in writing made by a person authorized in this behalf by the Central Government or the State Government.
The provision of Section 22 is given below:-
"Section 22. Cognizance of offences:-
No Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under this Act or any rules made thereunder except upon complaint in writing made by a person authorised in this behalf by the Central Government or the State Government."
Further submission is that the applicant shall fully cooperate with the investigation. Hence, the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail and he is ready to cooperate with the trial. If the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he will never misuse the same. Learned counsel for the applicant 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 applicant 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 applicant is arrested, he/her 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 applicant shall not leave India during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
2. The applicant shall surrender passports, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. The passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.
3. 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
4. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that the applicant 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.
5. In case, the applicant misuses 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 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 bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
However, it is directed that in such type of petty cases relating to the Mines Act, the anticipatory bail application should not be rejected in a routine without applying judicial mind.
Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Sessions Judge, Jalaun at Orai for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 27.9.2022/ Anuj Singh
