Allahabad High Court
Anand Banshakar And Another vs State Of U.P.And Another on 7 August, 2023
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:157693
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8468 of 2023
Applicant :- Anand Banshakar And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Devashish Tripathi,Brij Gopal,Jay Shankar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
2. This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 315 of 2021, under section 368 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Konch, District Jalaun during the pendency of investigation/trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants are not named in the FIR and their name came into light during investigation. It is further submitted that son of applicant no. 1 has solemnized marriage with the victim on 1.11.2021 and they are living as husband and wife and have also applied for registration of their marriage. It is further submitted that co accused Rajesh @ Chhotu, son of applicant no. 1 has already been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 3.08.2023 passed in Criminal Misc Anticipatory Bail Application No. 8700 of 2023. It is further submitted that there is no credible evidence to connect the applicants with the crime in question. The applicants are under apprehension of imminent arrest. It is further submitted that the charge sheet in the matter has already been submitted and the applicants have fully cooperated in the investigation.
4. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the said facts.
5. 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 applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
6. In the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicants Anand Banshakar and Bharat Banshakar involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- 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, 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; and
(2) The applicants shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
(3) The applicants shall surrender their passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(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 applicant.
(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 his in accordance with law.
7. In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
8. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 7.8.2023
RavindraKSingh
