Allahabad High Court
Ashutosh Agarwal @ Ashu vs State Of U.P. And Another on 25 April, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 427 of 2023
Appellant :- Ashutosh Agarwal @ Ashu
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Appellant :- Amit Rana,Rajesh Verma
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
List has been revised.
Despite service of notice on opposite party no.2 no one has turned up to oppose this appeal.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant to set aside the impugned order dated 31.10.2022, whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act Bijnor has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 308 of 2021, under Sections 506 IPC and Section 3(2)(Va), 3(1) Da, 3(1)Dha of SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Shahar District Bijnor.
There is allegation against co-accused, Deepak Garg, with whom daughter of the informant had love affair and wanted to marry. It is alleged that marriage was settled and gift were exchanged. Co-accused, Deepak Garg, did not took Barat for marriage of daughter of the informant. There is no allegation against the appellant in the first information report. It is alleged in the statement of the daughter of the informant that he has threatened and uttered caste related words on telephone stating that he will not marriage the victim.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that no CDR of aforesaid conversation was recovered by the Investigating Officer. Anticipatory Bail moved before the court has been rejected.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has supported the order passed by the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant and submits that the allegations involved are very serious in nature and the delay in lodging the FIR cannot be said to be fatal to the case at this juncture while considering the application of bail. But he could not point out any material to the contrary. He further submits that in case the appellant is released on bail, they will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
In view of above, the order of rejection of anticipatory bail passed by the court below dated 31.10..2022 is, hereby, set aside.
Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; appellant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,Court is of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
Anticipatory bail has wrongly been rejected by the court below without properly considering the material on record.
In the event of arrest, the appellant, Ashutosh Agarwal @ Ashu, shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the appellant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial 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 appellant shall not leave the country during the pendency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
2. The appellant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
3. That the appellant 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
4. The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants.
5. In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.
6. The appellant 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 his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/Govt. Advocate/concerned court is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the appellant.
The criminal appeal is allowed.
Order Date :- 25.4.2023
SS
