Allahabad High Court
Sanjay Gupta vs State Of U.P. And Another on 6 September, 2023
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:175625
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10076 of 2023
Applicant :- Sanjay Gupta
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Patel
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
2. This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 103 of 2023, under sections 323, 504, 506,452,147,411,379,188, 120-B IPC and Section 3 (2) (Ka) of the Prevention of Public Property Damage Act, 1984, P.S. Shaktinagar, District Sonbhadra, during the pendency of investigation.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has apprehension of arrest in the above mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. It is further submitted that the reason behind false implication is that the a company, namely, Northern Coalfield Ltd. Company has occupied the land of the applicant, whereas the Company had neither given the job nor given the possession of the land. It is further submitted that the FIR lodged by the Contractor of the said Company only for making the pressure upon the applicant. It is further submitted that neither any stolen property has been recovered from the possession of the applicant and no any damage has occurred as such no offence under Section 379 IPC or under Public Damages Act is made out against the applicant. The applicant is having definite apprehension that he may be arrested by the police any time.
4. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the said facts.
5. Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicant, he is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
6. In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant Sanjay Gupta involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50, 000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
(1) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation;
(2) 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and
(3) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
(4) The applicant shall surrender their passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(5) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicants.
(6) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.
(7) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of their bail and proceed against them in accordance with law.
7. In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.
8. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 6.9.2023
RavindraKSingh
