Allahabad High Court
Dinesh Chandra vs State Of U.P. on 2 February, 2024
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:18189
Court No. - 75
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6347 of 2023
Applicant :- Dinesh Chandra
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Dubey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Ajay Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.K.S. Parmar, 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 Case Crime No.16 of 2016, registered under Sections 307, 504, 506 I.P.C. at Police Station- North, District- Firozabad with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, two daughters of the informant were married to two real brothers Manoj Kumar and Vipin Kumar. Subsequent to it, the applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected them to cruelty for demand of dowry and the husband and wife duo are stated to have fallen apart, whereby both the daughters of the informant are stated to have started living in their maternal home. On 6.1.2016, the applicant and other co-accused persons are stated to have barged into the house of the informant and tried to strangulate his daughter Rubi and caused injuries to her.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant was not present at the scene of occurrence. The said story has been falsely foisted on the applicant. The applicant is the brother-in-law (Jeth) of the victim and has nothing to do with the said offence. Learned counsel has further stated that there is no possibility of the applicant or co-accused persons committing the said offence by going all the way to the house of in-laws of the co-accused persons.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the applicant was exonerated by the police and closure report was filed qua the applicant, but subsequent to it during trial, the Trial Judge has summoned the applicant by invoking the powers under Section 319 Cr.P.C. vide order dated 20.4.2017. Learned counsel has stated that the applicant was granted interim protection vide order dated 31.5.2023 of this Court and has not misused it. The applicant has appeared in court and he is ready to cooperate with trial in future also. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant.
7. 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. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel has stated that 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 A.G.A. has 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- Dinesh Chandra 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 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 :- 2.2.2024
Vikas
[Krishan Pahal, J.]
