Allahabad High Court
Mahendra And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 19 July, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:143552
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4347 of 2023
Applicant :- Mahendra And 3 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Yadav,Rajeev Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Nirbhay Singh
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Prashant Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Nirbhay Singh, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Sakeel Ahmad, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case Crime No.30 of 2023, registered under Sections 323, 325, 504, 506, 304 I.P.C. at Police Station- Sahavar, District Kasganj with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, an altercation entered into between the applicants and husband of the informant over the passage on the road as they had kept their tractor standing on the way, as such the applicants are stated to have hurled abuses and assaulted him on 25.10.2022 at about 05:00 p.m.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the FIR is ante-time as the medical examination of the injured/deceased was undertaken at PHC, Sahavar, district Kasganj on 25.10.2022 at 01:00 p.m. which is four hours before the alleged incident. The complete prosecution story stands falsified on this ground only. Learned counsel has stated that initially an NCR was instituted under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. that too after a delay of six days. The said period itself speaks volume of the falsity of the prosecution story as there is no explanation of the said delay caused.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants has further stated that the deceased had expired about two and half months after the incident due to septicemia as a result of antemortem injury. The applicants have been falsely implicated in this case out of vengeance. The applicants have no criminal history to their credit. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicants to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against them. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicants have also been touched upon at length. The applicants have apprehension of their arrest. Learned counsel has stated that the applicants undertake that they have co-operated in the investigation and are ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicants.
8. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A., considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants and taking into consideration the said discrepancy regarding medical examination and time of offence alleged in the NCR, the applicants are 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 applicants 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 applicants is allowed. Let the accused-applicants- Mahendra, Akhlesh, Mahesh and Chhabi Lal be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i). that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii). that the applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
(iii). that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v). that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi). that the applicants 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 below 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 :- 19.7.2023
Vikas
