Allahabad High Court
Hari Lal vs State Of U.P. on 16 August, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:163954
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8120 of 2023
Applicant :- Hari Lal
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Mishra,Dheeraj Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
3. Heard Sri Javed Alam, Advocate holding brief of Sri Dheeraj Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.M. Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
4. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.68 of 2023, registered under Sections 420, 468, 323, 504 and 506 IPC at Police Station- Bara, District Prayagraj with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
5. As per prosecution story, the contract for taking fish from the pond is stated to have awarded in favour of the society Jasra Matsya Jivi Sahkari Samiti Limited, Prayagraj and the members of the society are stated to have neither deposited the requisite money with the department despite several reminders given by them nor let anybody else run the said pond. The applicant and other co-accused persons are stated to have extracted about 11-12 quintals of fish from it.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about seven months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The allegations in the FIR are per se false. There is no injury report to corroborate the prosecution story. Learned counsel has further stated that the applicant is not an official in the said society. The applicant is merely an employee in it. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The criminal history assigned to the applicant stands explained. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.
8. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Hari Lal be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii). that 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
10. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.
Order Date :- 16.8.2023
Ravi Kant
(Krishan Pahal, J.)
