Allahabad High Court
Sugriv Pandit Alias Surgiav vs State Of U.P. on 2 May, 2024
Author: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:78373
Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4232 of 2024
Applicant :- Sugriv Pandit Alias Surgiav
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Pratap Singh, Rajesh Gupta
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.0166 of 2023, under Sections 366, 323, 504, 368, 370, 376 and 120-B IPC, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Mirzapur.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case, in fact, no such incident has taken place. The applicant has never committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. The impugned FIR has been lodged about two months of the alleged incident for which no explanation has been mentioned. The victim has stated that she lived with one Pandit for almost 20 days but during this period she has not raised any alarm. The victim was medically examined and her age was determined about 21 years, hence, she was major at the time of alleged incident. |As per medical report, no internal and external injury found on the body of the victim. He further submits that as per statement of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., there are material contradictions and the victim is a consenting party. Investigation is going on and till date no charge sheet has been submitted. He further submits that co-accused person, namely, Sunil Dubey has already been granted anticipatory by another co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.11.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.12206 of 2023, copy of the same has been annexed as Annexure No.2 to the affidavit. He further submits that applicant is having no previous criminal history as has been mentioned in paragraph 20 of the affidavit. The applicant has apprehension of imminent arrest and in case, applicant is released on anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would co-operate with the trial.
4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid contentions raised by learned counsel for the applicant.
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-Sugriv Pandit Alias Surgiav, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on 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:-
(i) 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.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
(iv) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(v) 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 applicant.
(vi) 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.
(vii) 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 his bail and proceed against his 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 applicant.
8. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application is disposed of.
Order Date :- 2.5.2024
Ajeet
