Allahabad High Court
Vipin Kumar @ Prakash And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 19 April, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3674 of 2023
Applicant :- Vipin Kumar @ Prakash And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Kakkar,Raghvendra Prakash
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Gaurav Kakkar, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case Crime No.141 of 2012, registered under Section 308 I.P.C. at Police Station Haldaur, District Bijnor with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.
4. The applicant was enlarged on regular bail by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division)/A.C.J.M., Court No.2, Bijnor vide order dated 24.7.2012 under Sections 325, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that later on, on an application moved under Section 323 Cr.P.C. by the informant, Section 308 I.P.C. has been added and the case has been committed to the Sessions Court. Learned Counsel has placed much reliance on the judgments of the Apex Court passed in case of Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth vs. State of Gujarat & Another, reported in 2016 (1) SCC (Cri) 240 and Manoj Suresh Jadhav & Ors. vs. The State of Maharashtra, reported in 2018 SCC OnLine SC 3428, wherein the applicant therein was enlarged on anticipatory bail in the added sections U/S 438 Cr.P.C. after being enlarged on regular bail U/S 439 Cr.P.C. Learned Counsel has also placed reliance on the judgment of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.9742 of 2021, wherein the accused was enlarged on anticipatory bail after being granted regular bail.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants has further stated that the applicants have been put to double jeopardy as they are already on bail and they have not misused the bail liberty. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicants to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against them. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicants have also been touched upon at length. The applicants have apprehension of their arrest. Learned counsel for the applicants undertakes that they have co-operated in the investigation and are ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicants.
8. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants, the applicants are liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the accused-applicants- Vipin Kumar @ Prakash and Yogendra Singh be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i). that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii). 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 or tamper with the evidence;
(iii). that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v). that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi). that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
10. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.
[Krishan Pahal, J.]
Order Date :- 19.4.2023
Vikas
