Allahabad High Court
Mehar Singh And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. on 5 May, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4338 of 2023
Applicant :- Mehar Singh And 4 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Singh Bais
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as Sri R.M. Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material available on record.
2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 11 of 1996, under Section 326 IPC, Police Station Fatehpur, District Saharanpur, with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.
3. Admittedly, the applicant was enlarged on regular bail in the present matter by the J.M.-1st, Saharanpur, vide order dated 24.1.1997. Learned counsel has stated that subsequent to it, Section 326 IPC was added by the trial Judge vide order dated 13.1.2000. Learned counsel has stated the the applicants had no knowledge of the addition of the said Section and were continuously appearing on trial for twenty-three years and were present in Court on 3.3.2023. After the perusal of the file, the advocate informed the applicants that they had not been enlarged on bail in the added section 326 IPC. Learned counsel has stated that the applicants have been put to double jeopardy as they were co-operating in trial. Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the applicants are maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive and have the apprehension of their arrest. The applicants have nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution.
4. Learned Counsel 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. Learned Counsel has also placed reliance on the judgment of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.9742 of 2021, wherein the accused was enlarged on anticipatory bail after being granted regular bail.
5. 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.
6. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed as the applicants have cooperated in the investigation. They have not misused the liberty granted to them. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed, they will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.
7. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicants.
8. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98", the applicants are entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.
9. Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed.
10. In the event of arrest of the applicants, Mehar Singh, Jasvir Singh, Bhangu Singh, Neeraj and Mukesh Kumar alias Ninnu involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-
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 him 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 previous permission of the court;
iv. that 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 are exempted;
11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicants.
12. It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicants shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
Order Date :- 5.5.2023
Shalini
