Allahabad High Court
Pankaj Kumar vs State Of U.P. And Another on 11 August, 2023
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:162851
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8760 of 2023
Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Kumar Mishra,Dibyanshu Kushwaha
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anoop Kumar Mishra,Harendra Prakash Dwivedi
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant, is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Rajiv Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, holding brief of Sri Anoop Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State as well as perused the material available on record.
3. This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Session Trial No.317 of 2019 (State Vs. Jabar Singh and others) arising out of Case Crime No.237 of 2019, under Sections 504/304 I.P.C., P.S.- Nawabganj, District- Allahabad, during the pendency of trial.
4. Initially an F.I.R. has been lodged under Section 504 and 307 I.P.C. against the applicant by the informant alleging therein that applicant along with co-accused Jabar Singh have started abusing the father of the informant and sons of the applicant one said to have poured the Kerosene oil upon the father of the informant and lit the fire. Thereafter, the matter was investigated and during investigation name of the applicant was exonerated. The name of the applicant was mentioned in the statement of P.W.1 Om Prakash who is informant (son of the deceased) in the proceeding, under Section 319 Cr.P.C., and thereafter, the learned court below vide its order dated 26.04.2022 summoned the applicant to face the trial under Section 504/304 I.P.C., applicant approached before the court below for anticipatory bail which was dismissed by the court below vide order dated 14.06.2023.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is the government servant and is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of this Court to the statement of Meena Devi and Ram Aasare who are not eye witnesses of the incident, they have stated that at the time of the incident, the applicant was not present at the place of incident. He submitted that no such Kerosene oil was used or recovered from the place of incident. He submitted that during investigation, the applicant has fully cooperated with the investigation, no charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant and after 319 Cr.P.C., the applicant was summoned. He submitted that P.W.1 and P.W.2 have been examined who are eye witnesses and the trial is going on and co-accused Jabar Singh has already been granted regular bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 29496 of 2019, vide order dated 18.03.2021, copy of the same is annexed as Annexure No.6 to the affidavit. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has no criminal history.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant and has submitted that as per F.I.R., a prima facie case is made out against the applicant, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for anticipatory bail.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicant, he is 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.
8. In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant-Pankaj Kumar, involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on 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:-
(i) The applicant shall co-operate with the trial.
(ii) The applicant 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 her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.
(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
(iv) The applicant shall surrender her passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. Her passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(v) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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.
(vi) In case, the applicant 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.
(vii) The applicant 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 her bail and proceed against her in accordance with law.
9. 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.
10. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 11.8.2023/A.
