Allahabad High Court
Chandraprakash Yadav And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 17 July, 2023
Bench: Nalin Kumar Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:145342
Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7941 of 2023
Applicant :- Chandraprakash Yadav And 2 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Suneel Kumar Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.
1. Vakalatnama filed by Sri Azaz Ahmad, advocate on behalf of the informant is taken on record.
2. This application has been moved on behalf of the applicants - Chandraprakash Yadav, Vijay Yadav and Mangal Yadav seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0156 of 2022, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506, 427, 308 IPC, Police Station Kandharapur, District Azamgarh.
3. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.
4. On 3.6.2022 at about 12:30 P.M., four accused persons including the present accused applicants came to the house of the informant and after damaging his boundary wall, they made an assault upon the son of the informant, who received serious injuries. F.I.R. was lodged and investigation started and now charge-sheet has been submitted into the matter.
5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and they have apprehension of their arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against them. They have been falsely implicated in this case. Allegations levelled against the applicants are false. The investigation of the case has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed and cognizance has been taken by the Court concerned. It is further submitted that no specific role has been assigned to the applicants and no serious injury has been caused to the injured. During investigation, the applicants have been fully cooperative. It is further submitted that the alleged offences are punishable with the imprisonment of a maximum period of seven years. In case applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.
6. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
7. It appears from the perusal of the medical report / C.T. scan report that a contusion was found on the left parietal region, which appears to be a grievous injury. At this stage, no possibility of false implication of the applicants comes into light.
8. In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the controversy finally by holding the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.
It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial.
It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.
9. Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, in my view, it is not a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicants till the end of trial. The prayer made in the application is refused.
10. However, it is observed that the bail application of the applicants, if moved, shall be considered and decided by the Court concerned in terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825.
It is further directed that the learned court concerned, while considering the bail application of the applicants in the light of Satender Kumar Antil case (supra), shall pass an order strictly in compliance of the directions given in the aforesaid judgment by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in letter and spirit, particularly complying with the order dated 21.3.2023 of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid matter.
11. The anticipatory bail application stands disposed of accordingly.
Order Date :- 17.7.2023
ss
