Allahabad High Court
Harish vs State Of U.P. on 22 August, 2023
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:169098
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9511 of 2023
Applicant :- Harish
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Manvendra Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1. Heard Mr. Manvendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant 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.119-0 of 1991, under Section 436 IPC, Police Station Sarai Akil, District Kaushambi.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case just to harass the applicant in fact no such incident has taken place as alleged in the impugned FIR. The applicant has never committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. Initially the impugned FIR has been lodged against four accused persons including the applicant. It is a case of no injury. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. Earlier the applicant has filed Application u/s 482 No.5226 of 2002 challenging the charge sheet and this Court vide order dated 23.05.2002 has stayed the further proceedings. He further submits that ultimately the said application was dismissed in default vacating the interim order vide order dated 24.05.2013. He further submits that the applicant was not aware about the order dated 24.05.2023 and even communication was not sent to the applicant and ultimately on 02.11.2022 the Magistrat has issued summon to the applicant in the light of law laid down in the case of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd and another vs. Central Bureau of Investigation. Bailable warrant has also been issued against the applicant. He further submits that similarly placed co-accused Vijay Kesarwani has already been granted anticipatory bail by another co-rodnate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.08.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.9439 of 2023. The applicant is having no previous criminal history as has been mentioned in paragraph 42 of the affidavit.He further submits that applicant has apprehension of imminent arrest and in case, the applicant is released on anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would co-operate with the trial.
4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant.
5. Hence 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.
6. In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant-Harish, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial 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 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.
(ii) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
(iii) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(iv) 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.
(v) 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.
(vi) 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 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 :- 22.8.2023
Ajeet
