Allahabad High Court
Jai Prakash Yadav vs State Of U.P And Another on 3 February, 2023
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 77
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13878 of 2021
Applicant :- Jai Prakash Yadav
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Akash Deep Srivastava,Parvez Alam
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 0165 of 2019, under Sections 41, 411, 413 IPC, Police Station-Kalyanpur, District-Fatehpur, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
On 29.7.2021, a coordinate Bench of this Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. by the investigating officer with certain conditions mentioned therein.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed on 19.8.2021. He further submits that the applicant abiding by the conditions enumerated in the earlier order of this Court, cooperated in the investigation fairly and undertakes to face the trial without seeking any unnecessary adjournment. It is also contended that the applicant did not misuse the liberty granted by this Court. Learned counsel next submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present with ulterior motive as he was not involved in smuggling of selling of diesel whereas the same was being taken by him for personal use in a function which was to be organized at his relative's place.
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.
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.
In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed.
Let the accused-applicant ? Jai Prakash Yadav be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime 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 trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. The applicant shall not leave India during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
2. The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.
3. 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
4. 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.
5. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the trial Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1.
6. 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 him in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 3.2.2023
DS
