Allahabad High Court
Salim And Another vs State Of U.P. on 21 March, 2023
Bench: Nalin Kumar Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13495 of 2022
Applicant :- Salim And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Rao,Pawan Kumar Rao
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Atul Kumar Yadav,Sanjeeva Kumar Yadava
Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA and perused the material available on record.
Present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants- Salim and Rashid in Case Crime No. 14 of 2022 under Sections 323, 504, 506,427, 452, 325 I.P.C., Police Station- Bhadohi, District- Bhadohi.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have no concern with the present matter. Allegations levelled against the applicants are false. It is further submitted that charge-sheet has been submitted in the matter. Applicants' case is squarely covered under Section 438 Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that if the applicants is enlarged on bail, they will not misuse the liberty. The applicants have apprehension of their arrest any time.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer.
I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record carefully.
In this matter, as is evident from the record, offences levelled against the applicants are of Sections 323, 504, 506,427, 452, 325 IPC, which are punishable with the imprisonment upto seven years. The applicants have accorded their co-operation in the investigation. 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, llikelihood 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.
Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant 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 the trial.
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.
On the basis of specific request of the learned counsel for the applicant, it is further directed that the learned court concerned, while considering the bail application of the applicant 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.
The application stands disposed of accordingly.
Order Date :- 21.3.2023//Fhd
