Allahabad High Court
Gopal Sarraf @ Narsingh Kumar ... vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 6 January, 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. - 10772 of 2022
Applicant :- Gopal Sarraf @ Narsingh Kumar Kesari
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Dheerendra Kumar Srivastava,Rajrshi Gupta,Zain Abbas
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Hare Krishan Pandey,Kitab Ali,Suresh Chandra Mishra,Syed Ahmed Faizan
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mr. Dileep Kumar, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Zain Abbas, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Syed Ahmed Faizan, learned counsel for the informant, Mr. Rakesh Soni, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.
The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 1100 of 2019, under Sections 376-D IPC and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, P.S. Naini, District-Allahabad, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.
An FIR was lodged on 1.11.2019 at about 18:00 p.m. by father of the victim against Anshu Keshari with the allegations that on 29.10.2019, the daughter of the informant was enticed away by the applicant. It has also been mentioned that the victim took away along with her some money as well as jewelleries.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. He further submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is not named in the FIR nor the charge sheet has been submitted against him. He has been summoned by the court below under Section 319 Cr.P.C. on the basis of the statement of the victim. Subsequently, an affidavit dated 13.12.2022 on behalf of the informant has been placed before the court concerned mentioning therein that under some wrong impression, the name of the applicant was given by the victim. From the aforesaid affidavit, it is clear that the applicant is not involved in the alleged incident. 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 for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but is unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant. Learned counsel for the informant/opposite party no.2 has filed a counter affidavit supporting the case of the applicant wherein such affidavit on behalf of the informant dated 13.12.2022 placed before the court concerned, has been annexed as Annexure no.CA-1 at page 13 of the counter affidavit, from which, it is clear that the applicant is not involved, in any manner, in the incident and has been falsely implicated in the present case.
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 to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (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- Gopal Sarraf @ Narsingh Kumar Kesari be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2.The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3.The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5. 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 or tamper with the evidence.
It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the Court below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of applicant in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 6.1.2023
Jitendra/-
