Allahabad High Court
Sarvajeet Shukla vs State Of U.P. ... on 22 February, 2023
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 12
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 332 of 2022
Applicant :- Sarvajeet Shukla
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Deptt. Of Home And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Dharm Raj Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. apprehending his arrest in Case Crime No.130 of 2020, under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, Police Station Payagpur, District Bahraich.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent and perused the material available on record.
The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.03.2022 has granted interim protection to the applicant and noted the gist of the controversy. The order is extracted below:-
"Heard learned counsel for the applicant 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 applicant in Case Crime No. 130 of 2020, under Section 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act, Police Station Payagpur, District Bahraich, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
As per prosecution story, 85 kg of rice was found to be less than the quantity allotted to the applicant, who is the proprietor of the fair price shop.
Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. 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. Learned counsel undertakes that he 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 applicant.
Matter requires consideration.
Learned A.G.A. prays for and is granted three weeks' time to file counter affidavit.
Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within one week, thereafter.
On due consideration to the arguments advance 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, as an interim measure, is 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 applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
In the event of arrest, the accused-applicant- Sarvajeet Shukla 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 applicant shall make himself available for interrogation as and when required;
(ii) 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; and
(iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.
List on 5th April, 2022 in the additional cause list. "
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that charge-sheet has been filed, he has not misused the liberty granted by the court. He undertakes to cooperate in the trial. It is submitted by learned counsel for applicant that F.I.R. is lodged on the allegation that 85 KG. rice was found to be less than the quantity allotted to the applicant. Learned counsel for applicant further submits that as per the F.I.R. so also the statement of Vipadan Adhikari, Santosh Kumar Srivastava the rice was allotted and disbursed to the applicant without weighing and therefore, once no weighment of the rice was done at the time of delivery to the applicant, the entire allegation of the prosecution that 85 KG rice was found less is misconceived.
Learned A.G.A. though has opposed the bail prayer however, could not dispute the fact that in the statement of Santosh Kumar Srivastava, Vipdan Adhikari, it is admitted that no weighbridge was installed at the place of Vipdan Adhikari who allotted it to the applicant during Covid-19 pandemic under extreme urgency on average basis without weighing the same by the weighbridge.
On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record so also considering the fact that charge-sheet has been filed, the applicant has not misused the liberty granted by this Court, applicant further undertakes to cooperate in the trial so also the statement of Khadya Vipdan Adhikari, Santosh Kumar Srivastava, it would be expedient in the interest of justice that the liberty of the applicant may be protected in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.
In view of the above, since, charge-sheet in the matter has been filed, the accused applicant is directed to surrender before trial court, if he is summoned to face trial for offence in question. The accused applicant-Sarvajeet Shukla shall be released on bail by the trial court on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of 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 tamper with the evidence;
(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;
Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed.
It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed.
Order Date :- 22.2.2023
Saurabh Yadav/-
