Allahabad High Court
Mukul Upadhyay vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 10 May, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:100560
Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11654 of 2022
Applicant :- Mukul Upadhyay
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Niklank Kumar Jain,Amit Daga
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashutosh Mishra
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Rejoinder affidavits filed by learned counsel for the applicant are taken on record.
3. Heard Sri Niklank Kumar Jain, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashutosh Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Rohit Dubey, 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 Criminal Case No.3348 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No.292 of 2020, registered under Sections 498-A, 323, 307 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, at Police Station- Awagarh, District Etah with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
5. As per prosecution story, the applicant was granted interim protection by this Court vide order dated 3.12.2022. Perusal of the said order indicates that the allegations of assault have been leveled against the sisters of the applicant and the applicant has not been assigned any role of assaulting by the screw driver.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the FIR is delayed by about three months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Although, the injury report indicates scar on the chest of the victim but the duration could not be ascertained. Learned counsel has further stated that the applicant has no other previous criminal history except the present case. 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 for 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.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application on the ground that the injury report itself indicates that there is scar on the chest of the victim which corroborates the prosecution story. Learned counsel has further stated that an NCR was instituted against the applicant subsequent to the present FIR. Although, the closure report has been filed in it as it was investigated by the police, but the said closure report has been challenged by the informant.
8. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A., taking into consideration the fact that the FIR is delayed by about three months and duration of injury also could not be ascertained, and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of 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- Mukul Upadhyay 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 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 :- 10.5.2023
Vikas
