Allahabad High Court
Shailendra Mishra vs State Of U.P. on 25 January, 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. - 13066 of 2021
Applicant :- Shailendra Mishra
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Kumar Singh,Rajesh Kumar Pandey,Shri Kant Vishwakarma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohd Raziullah
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
The applicant has moved the present application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying for grant of anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.923 of 2019, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station- Mandion, District- Lucknow.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State who has opposed the bail.
Gist of the issue involved in the present anticipatory bail application is given in order dated 15.3.2022, which is extracted below :
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shagun Ahmad, Advocate holding brief of Sri Mohd. Raziullah, learned counsel for the first Informant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 923 of 2019, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station- Mandion, District- Lucknow, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
As per the prosecution story, one Jwala Prasad Yadav, Bharat Chawla, Pankaj Gupta and Mohd. Fahad Khan in connivance with some officials of IIFL are said to have duped the first Informant by selling the plot of 750 sq.ft.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is not named in the FIR. His name has crept up in the statement of co-accused person recorded by the police wherein he has stated to have provided the applicant with Rs.5 lakh as his share in the said bounty. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation failing which the State can move appropriate application for vacation of the interim protection.
Sri Shagun Ahmad, Advocate holding brief of Sri Mohd. Raziullah, learned counsel for the first Informant as well as learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.
On due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and also considering the nature of accusations, 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 Shailendra Mishra, 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 concerned court below 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.
The counter affidavit on behalf of the State has already been filed.
Learned counsel for the first Informant prays for and is granted three weeks' time to file counter affidavit.
List this application on 26.04.2022. ."
Considering the fact that the applicant was granted interim protection vide order extracted above, he has cooperated in the investigation and further undertakes to cooperate in the trial, and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case in the light of judgment of Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1, subject to his cooperation in the trial.
In view of the above. the accused applicant is directed to surrender before trial court if he is summoned to face trial for offence in question after filing of the charge sheet. The accused applicant shall be released on bail by the trial court on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, 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 anticipatory bail application is allowed.
Order Date :- 25.1.2023
kkb/
