Allahabad High Court
Pankaj Sharma vs State Of U.P. on 19 April, 2023
Bench: Nalin Kumar Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2541 of 2023
Applicant :- Pankaj Sharma
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Javed Raza
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Utkarsh Khanna
Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.
This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant - Pankaj Sharma seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.384 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 323, 376-B, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Phase-II, District Gautam Budh Nagar.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
It is alleged against the applicant in the F.I.R. that a divorce case was pending between the applicant and the informant / victim of the case and during the pendency of divorce proceedings, he, on the pretext of making some compromise, called the informant / victim in a hotel room and made physical relations with her. It is also alleged in the F.I.R. that on account of demand of additional dowry, the informant / victim was being subjected to cruelty and harassment by the present applicant, the husband and also by the father-in-law and mother-in-law, the co-accused persons in this case.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of his arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. He has been falsely implicated in this matter. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. The investigation of the case has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed in the matter. It is further submitted that the F.I.R. has been lodged with a delay of five months and no explanation has been given thereof. Offences alleged in the F.I.R. are punishable upto 7 years. It is further submitted that in case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
In this matter, it reveals that after completion of investigation, charge sheet has been submitted and cognizance has also been taken by the Court concerned.
In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the controversy finally by holding the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.
It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial.
It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, llikelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.
Hence, 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 of the merits of the case, in my view, it is not a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till the end of trial. The prayer made in the application is refused.
However, it is observed that the bail application of the applicant, if moved, shall be considered and decided by the Court concerned in terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825.
It is further directed that the learned court concerned, while considering the bail application of the applicant in the light of Satender Kumar Antil case (supra), shall pass an order strictly in compliance of the directions given in the aforesaid judgment by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in letter and spirit, particularly complying with the order dated 21.3.2023 of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid matter.
The application stands disposed of accordingly.
Order Date :- 19.4.2023
ss
