Allahabad High Court
Jawahar Singh vs State Of U.P. And Another on 12 May, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:103225
Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4737 of 2023
Applicant :- Jawahar Singh
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Prakash Dwivedi,Pranshu Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Ram Prakash Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Nitin Kesharwani, 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 applicant in Crime No.273 of 1991, registered under Section 376 IPC at Police Station- Etmadpur, District Agra with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have raped the informant, who happens to be his sister-in-law in the morning of 25.11.1991.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. After investigation, the closure report was filed in that case on 13.12.1991, but on the protest petition of the informant, the applicant was summoned by the ACJM, Court 7, Agra vide order dated 23.11.1992. Learned counsel has further stated that the applicant had challenged the said summoning order by filing a petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.2751 of 1993 before this Court and the proceedings were kept in abeyance vide order dated 05.02.1993 of this Court.
6. Learned counsel has further stated that the case was not taken up and in the light of the judgment of Apex Court passed in the case of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. and Another vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2018 (16) SCC 299, the said stay has been vacated and notice has been issued against the applicant by the Magistrate concerned vide order dated 10.02.2023. The applicant is 77 years old person and he has every apprehension of his arrest. Subsequent to the present FIR, the informant had instituted another case against the applicant which resulted in acquittal vide order dated 17.04.2000. The victim has even filed her affidavit before the authorities that she had mistakenly lodged the FIR and does not want to proceed in the present case also. 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. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicant. 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.
6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.
7. 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 applicant is the person of 77 years of age, 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.
8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Jawahar Singh 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.
9. 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 :- 12.5.2023
Ravi Kant
