Allahabad High Court
Jawahir And 6 Others vs State Of U.P. . And Another on 24 August, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:171305
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5437 of 2023
Applicant :- Jawahir And 6 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. . And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Bhushan Yadav,Krishna Pratap Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Radhey Shyam Chauhan
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised. Learned counsel for the informant is not present.
2. Heard Sri Krishna Pratap Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Complaint Case No.169 of 2019 (Jiledar and Others vs. State of U.P.), registered under Sections 352, 427, 504, 506, 458, 379 and 447 IPC at Police Station- Sarai Khwaja, District Jaunpur with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the applicants were enlarged on interim anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 15.05.2023. They have not misused the opportunity granted earlier and have co-operated during investigation.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. The allegations levelled in the complaint are false and cannot be substantiated by any cogent evidence. Learned counsel has further stated that there are no criminal antecedents of the applicants. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicants to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against them. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicants have also been touched upon at length. The applicants have apprehension of their arrest. Learned counsel for the applicants undertakes that they have co-operated in the investigation and are ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
6. 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 applicants.
7. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants, the applicants are 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 applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the accused-applicants- Jawahir, Jiledar, Jamadar, Beeru, Rambali, Achchhelal and Anant be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i). that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii). that 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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
(iii). that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v). that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi). that the applicants 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.
9. 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 :- 24.8.2023
Ravi Kant
(Krishan Pahal, J.)
