Allahabad High Court
Dinesh vs State Of U.P. on 7 August, 2023
Bench: Nalin Kumar Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:159685
Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8825 of 2023
Applicant :- Dinesh
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Goyal
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.
1. Crl. Misc. Exemption Application No.1 of 2023 is allowed.
2. This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant - Dinesh seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.325 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 506, 308, 427 IPC, Police Station Saiyan, District Agra.
3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
4. It has been argued 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. 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. During investigation, the applicant has fully cooperated. It has been submitted that the alleged offences are punishable with the imprisonment for a maximum period of seven years. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.
5. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that the offence committed by the applicant is serious in nature, therefore, he may not be granted anticipatory bail.
6. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record carefully.
7. In this matter, after completion of investigation, charge sheet has been submitted and cognizance has also been taken by the Court concerned. It appears from the perusal of the medical report that two injured persons namely, Harichand and Narendra have sustained injuries of blunt object and sharp edged object. Injured Harichand has sustained grievous injuries on his head in the form of incised wound 3.5 cm. x 0.5 cm. x bone deep on left side forehead 3 cm. from left eyebrow, margin regular, fresh clotted wound present. Injured Narendra also received head injury. At this stage, no possibility of false implication of the applicant comes into light.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. The anticipatory bail application stands disposed of accordingly.
Order Date :- 7.8.2023
ss
