Allahabad High Court
Dheeraj Kumar Singh vs State Of U.P. on 24 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. - 10943 of 2022
Applicant :- Dheeraj Kumar Singh
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Kunwar Aditya Pratap Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Karunesh Pratap Singh
Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.
This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant - Dheeraj Kumar Singh seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.49 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 307 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Gorakhpur.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and they has apprehension of his arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. The investigation of the case has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed and cognizance has been taken by the Court concerned. It has been 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. as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
It is alleged that the victim was subjected to cruelty and harassment for want of dowry by her in-laws. Specific role has been assigned to the present applicant, who is the husband of the victim. Though it has been vehemently argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that in dowry cases, it is a common phenomenon to indulge and rope all the family members of the matrimonial home, but in the present matter, specific role of causing cruelty and harassment has been assigned to the present applicant and during investigation, sufficient evidence has been found and charge-sheet has been submitted in the matter. Petition under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal right is said to be filed by the applicant. The offences alleged against the applicant are punishable with the imprisonment upto maximum period of seven years.
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 :- 24.4.2023
ss
