Allahabad High Court
Javed And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 3 October, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:189224
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10310 of 2023
Applicant :- Javed And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- A.C.Srivastava,Subham Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.
3. Heard Sri A.C. Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri V.K.S. Parmar, 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 applicants in Case Crime No.85 of 1999, registered under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C. at Police Station- Railway Road, District- Meerut with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.
5. As per prosecution story, the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons are stated to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant on 17.4.1999 at about 05:00 p.m.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. The victim is a consenting party and her age was 20 years at the time of offence. To buttress his argument, learned counsel has placed much reliance on the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., whereby she has stated that she and the applicant no.1 Javed had married each other out of their own sweet-will but the family members were not ready to get them married. Learned counsel has further stated that the applicant no.1 has no criminal antecedent to his credit. The criminal history of five cases assigned to applicant no.2 stands explained vide supplementary affidavit filed in Court today.
7. Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by the applicants is pending. The applicants were granted protection in the said petition but in the light of judgment of the Apex Court in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Private Limited and Another vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2018) 16 SCC 299 the said stay order stood vacated.
8. 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. The applicants have apprehension of their arrest. Learned counsel has stated that the applicants undertake that they have co-operated in the investigation and are ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
9. 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 applicants.
10. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants, the applicants are 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 applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
11. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the accused-applicants- Javed and Kaleem be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(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 them 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 the previous permission of the court;
(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted 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 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.
12. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.
Order Date :- 3.10.2023
Vikas
[Krishan Pahal, J.]
