Ramsukh And 6 Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 4823 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 11
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 326 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Ramsukh And 6 Others
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Tiwari
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bhup Chandra Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.

By means of this application, modification has been prayed of the order dated 12.10.2022 passed by this Court which reads as under:

"Heard Sri Anil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-respondents and Sri Bhup Chandra Singh, learned counsel for the informant/ complainant.

As per learned counsel for the applicants, the present applicants are apprehending their arrest in Case Crime No.352 of 2020, under Sections 308, 323, 325, 504 & 506/34 IPC, Police Station-Chanda, District-Sultanpur.

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the present applicants have been falsely implicated in this case as they have not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story so narrated in the FIR (in short F.I.R.).

The attention of this Court has been drawn towards the interim anticipatory bail order dated 04.03.2022 passed by this Court, granting protection to the present applicants under the impression that investigation is going on. For convenience, the order dated 04.03.2022 is being reproduced here-in-below:-

"Heard learned counsel for the applicants and 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 applicants in Case Crime No. 352 of 2020, under Sections 308, 323, 325, 504, 506, 34 Indian Penal Code, Police Station Chanda, District Sultanpur, with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.

As per prosecution story, the applicant and other co-accused persons are said to have inflicted injuries to the first informant and Prahlad, Chatkeela, Anil, Ram Murti, Wakeel, Maneeta, Sunita, Manish Sobhawati, Nirmala and others on 13.9.2020 at about 4.00 pm.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated only to harass them. Learned counsel has stated that the said case has been falsely foisted against the applicant and the other co-accused persons to nullify the first information report lodged in Case Crime No. 351 of 2020 which was originally under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308 and 34 IPC and on account of death of the injured Ram Sewak later on, who expired on 15.9.2020 at 11.26 am, the cross case was transformed under Section 302 IPC. Learned counsel for the applicants undertakes that they will cooperate in the investigation failing which the State can move appropriate application for vacation of the interim protection.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicants.

Matter requires consideration.

Learned A.G.A. prays for and is granted three weeks' time to file counter affidavit.

One week's time, thereafter, is granted to learned counsel for applicant for filing rejoinder affidavit.

On due consideration to the arguments advance 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, as an interim measure, are liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the Constitution Bench judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98". 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.

In the event of arrest, the accused-applicants, Ramsukh, Soorsati, Sanjay @ Sanjay Nishad, Monu, Reete @ Reeta Devi, Sudma @ Sudama Devi and Fool Kumari, shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned on the following conditions:-

(i) the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation as and when required;

(ii) 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; and

(iii) the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

List this case on 5th April, 2022 in the additional cause list."

In para-4 of the aforesaid order, the submission of learned counsel for the applicants has been indicated that the present applicants will co-operate with the investigation, failing which, the State can move appropriate application for vacation of interim protection.

Learned Additional Government Advocate as well as Sri Bhup Chandra Singh, learned counsel for the informant/ complainant have submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case on 02.12.2020 and the Court concerned has taken cognizance of the aforesaid charge-sheet on 07.04.2021 as the copy of the aforesaid charge-sheet has been annexed as Annexure No.3 with this application.

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that he has not concealed any material before this Court, however in the order it has been indicated that all the applicants will co-operate in the investigation. He has further submitted that the applicants are not avoiding the process of law and they are ready to co-operate in the trial proceedings.

Sri Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants has further submitted that since the F.I.R. was lodged under those sections where the punishment is upto seven years, therefore, notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. was issued against them and they co-operated in the investigation.

Sri Bhup Chandra Singh, learned counsel for the informant/ complainant has submitted that till date the case has not been committed to the sessions inasmuch as the charge-sheet has been filed under Section 308 I.P.C. besides other sections.

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the aforesaid protection was given after filing of the charge-sheet as the copy of the charge-sheet has been annexed as Annexure No.3 to this application. He has also submitted that the present applicants shall co-operate with the trial proceedings in the same manner as they have co-operated with the investigation.

Since charge-sheet has been filed in the present case under sections wherein the punishment is upto seven years and the present applicants are said to have been participating in the trial proceedings, therefore, I do not find any good ground to keep this application pending any longer.

Therefore, in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in re; Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI and others, Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.5191 of 2021, Siddharth vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., Criminal Appeal No.838 of 2021 and Aman Preet Singh vs. C.B.I. through Director, Criminal Appeal No.929 of 2021, arrest of the present applicants may not be warranted.

Hence, it is expected from the learned court below to abide by the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in re; Satender Kumar Antil (supra), Siddharth (supra) and Aman Preet Singh (supra) as the law propounded by the Apex Court is the law of land and everyone is duty bound to follow such law in its letter and spirit. It is also observed that the present applicants shall also co-operate with the trial proceedings properly.

However, in such circumstances, there is no need to pass any order granting anticipatory bail as, prima facie, it appears that there is no apprehension of the arrest of the present applicants.

Before parting with, it is expected that the trial shall be concluded with expedition, strictly in accordance with law, without adjourning the case for any unnecessary reason. Further, the learned trial court may take all coercive measures, as per law, if either of the parties do not co-operate in the trial properly.

The instant anticipatory bail application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms."

The aforesaid order dated 12.10.2022 is a detailed order indicating the relevant case, laws and reasons, therefore, it does not require any modification. At the same time, it is expected from the learned Trial Court to abide by the law settled by the Apex Court in re; Satender Kumar Antil (supra), Siddharth (supra) and Aman Preet Singh (supra).

It has been informed by the learned counsel for the applicant that they are appearing before the learned Trial Court in terms of the order dated 12.10.2022. Therefore, the trial be expedited strictly in accordance with law.

Therefore, the instant application is disposed of.

.

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

Order Date :- 14.2.2023

Manoj K.