Allahabad High Court
Jeetu Tiwari @ Jitendra Tiwari vs State Of U.P. And Another on 14 July, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:140175
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6212 of 2023
Applicant :- Jeetu Tiwari @ Jitendra Tiwari
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for the informant is taken on record.
3. Heard Sri Ashish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ganga Bhushan Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
4. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.473 of 2017, registered under Sections 363, 366, 376(2) IPC and 6 of POCSO Act, at Police Station- Sumerpur, District Hamirpur with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that admittedly the applicant was enlarged on bail by this Court under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C. and 8 of POCSO Act vide order dated 8.6.2018 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.21638 of 2018. Learned counsel has stated that subsequent to it the trial has taken up and two prosecution witnesses have been examined and Sections 376(2) I.P.C. and 6 of POCSO Act have been added later on. Learned counsel has further stated that the applicant has not misused the said liberty granted to 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. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel has stated that 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.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed much reliance on the judgments of the Apex Court passed in case of Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth vs. State of Gujarat & Another reported in 2016 (1) SCC (Cri) 240 and Manoj Suresh Jadhav & Ors. vs. The State of Maharashtra, reported in 2018 SCC OnLine SC 3428, wherein the applicant therein was enlarged on anticipatory bail in the added sections U/S 438 Cr.P.C. after being enlarged on regular bail U/S 439 Cr.P.C.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.
8. 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 and the aforesaid case law produced by learned counsel for 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.
9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Jeetu Tiwari @ Jitendra Tiwari be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii). 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
10. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.
[Krishan Pahal, J.]
Order Date :- 14.7.2023
Vikas
