Allahabad High Court
Km. Madhu Bala Mishra And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. on 4 April, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 85
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3296 of 2023
Applicant :- Km. Madhu Bala Mishra And 3 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Verma,Akash Tomar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State.
The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants, Km. Madhu Bala Mishra, Ravindra Kumar Vishnoi, Gopal Singh and Smt. Kusum Devi, with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 248C of 2005, under Sections- 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 and 379 IPC, Police Station- Nagina, District- Bijnor.
There is allegation against the applicants that they have embezzled about Rs. 13 lakhs after manipulation of the record of a society. The applicants alleged that they have been implicated in this case on the basis of the fabricated records of the society provided by the informant. The implication has been made by way of proceedings under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. Initially, final report was submitted by the investigating officer. After eight months final report was cancelled by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Bijnor and thereafter chargesheet was submitted against the applicants. A compromise was also filed before the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate by the parties which was rejected. The order rejecting the compromise was challenged before this Court by means of a petition under section 482 Cr.P.C., which has been dismissed as infrutuous on 30th of November, 2021. This case has chequered history and the applicants will cooperate with the trial in case they are enlarged on anticipatory bail. They have no criminal history to their credits. The applicants have definite apprehension that they may be arrested by the police any time.
Learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicants. He has submitted that in view of the seriousness of the allegations made against the applicants, they are not entitled to grant of anticipatory bail. The apprehension of the applicants are not founded on any material on record. Only on the basis of imaginary fear anticipatory bail cannot be granted.
After considering the rival submissions this court finds that there is a case registered/about to be registered against the applicants. It cannot be definitely said when the police may apprehend him. After the lodging of FIR the arrest can be made by the police at will. There is no definite period fixed for the police to arrest an accused against whom an FIR has been lodged. The courts have repeatedly held that arrest should be the last option for the police and it should be restricted to those exceptional cases where arresting the accused is imperative or his custodial interrogation is required. Irrational and indiscriminate arrests are gross violation of human rights. In the case of Joginder Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1994 SC 1349 the Apex Court has referred to the third report of National Police Commission wherein it is mentioned that arrests by the police in India is one of the chief source of corruption in the police. The report suggested that, by and large, nearly 60 percent of the arrests were either unnecessary or unjustified and that such unjustified police action accounted for 43.2 percent of expenditure of the jails. Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental rights and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative. According to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the peculiar case the arrest of an accused should be made.
Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicants, they are directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
In the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicants 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 applicants shall not leave the country during the pendency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
2. The applicants shall surrender their passports, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. Their passports will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
3. 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;
4. The applicants 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 applicants misuse 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 applicants 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 them 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 applicant.
Order Date :- 4.4.2023
Rohit
