Allahabad High Court
Fateh Khan And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 24 May, 2023
Bench: Nalin Kumar Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:118345
Court No. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4118 of 2023
Applicant :- Fateh Khan And 3 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohd Faizyab Rahamani,Pradeep Kumar
Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.
1. This application has been moved on behalf of the applicants - Fateh Khan, Jeeshan, Pappu @ Suhail Ahmad and Meraj seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.504 of 2021, under Sections 147, 323, 354-B IPC and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Manjhanpur, District Kaushambi.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.
3. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that on 11.10.2021 at about 4:30 in the evening, the accused applicants tried to outrage the modesty of the minor niece of the informant and also made an assault upon her grandmother. F.I.R. was lodged and investigation started. Now charge-sheet has been submitted after conclusion of the investigation.
4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and have apprehension of their arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against them. Allegations levelled against the applicants are false. It is further submitted that there is a cross case of the matter and no incident, as alleged in the F.I.R., occurred on the said date. In her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the minor victim has not stated anything regarding any sexual offence committed against her and she has developed a false story in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that only minor injuries have been caused to the injured person in this case. Applicants have been cooperative during the course of investigation. Now after filing of charge-sheet, they are entitled for anticipatory bail. It is further submitted that the criminal history of the applicants has been explained and the applicants side has also sustained grievous injuries in the case lodged against the informant side. It is further submitted that the alleged offences are punishable with the imprisonment of maximum period of seven years. In case the applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.
5. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record carefully.
7. In this matter, offences levelled in the matter are punishable with the imprisonment of maximum period of seven years. After completion of investigation, charge sheet has been submitted and cognizance has also been taken by the Court concerned.
8. 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, likelihood 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.
9. Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicants 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 trial. The prayer made in the application is refused.
10. 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.
It is further directed that the learned court concerned, while considering the bail application of the applicants 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, particularly complying with the order dated 21.3.2023 of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid matter.
11. The anticipatory bail application stands disposed of accordingly.
Order Date :- 24.5.2023 / ss
