Allahabad High Court
Talib vs State Of U.P. And Another on 20 September, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:182233
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7156 of 2022
Applicant :- Talib
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ch. Dil Nisar,Neeraj Kumar Chaurasiya
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.
3. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ch. Dil Nisar, learned counsel for the informant 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 applicant in Case Crime No.40 of 2019, registered under Sections 498A, 323, 325, 307, 109 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act at Police Station- Mahila Thana, District Saharanpur with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant was granted anticipatory bail by this Court till the submission of report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. vide order dated 17.02.2021 and has not misused the opportunity granted earlier on.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the role of the applicant is at a different footing to the co-accused persons as he is stated to have abetted the co-accused persons to commit the said crime, as such Section 109 I.P.C. has been added against the applicant. The other co-accused persons, namely, Tamshiran, Rihana, Gulista and Najreen, have been enlarged on anticipatory bail by the Sessions Judge, Saharanpur vide order dated 12.03.2021 and the anticipatory bail application of the applicant has been rejected only on the ground that the proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. were initiated against him on the date of filing of the anticipatory bail application.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the said statement of the public prosecutor was false as the order-sheet, annexed with the supplementary affidavit dated 29.08.2022, indicates that on 22.08.2022, only NBW was issued and it was stated that on 09.09.2021, the proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. shall be taken up, as such the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is liable to be allowed. The applicant had filed the anticipatory bail before promulgation of any order under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. 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. 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.
8. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.
9. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. 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.
10. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant-Talib 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 concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
11. 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 :- 20.9.2023
Ravi Kant
(Krishan Pahal, J.)
