Allahabad High Court
Sudama Lal vs State Of U.P. on 8 May, 2024
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:82776
Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4044 of 2024
Applicant :- Sudama Lal
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Saurabh Pathak
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Saurabh Pathak, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, 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. 31 of 2024, registered under Section 409 I.P.C. at Police Station- Sikandra, District- Kanpur Dehat with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant in collusion with the co-accused person Sri Girish Chandra is stated to have illegally siphoned off the gold ornaments which were kept as case property in the malkhana of the police station.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the said case property was deposited in the malkhana in the year 2011 and the applicant was given the charge of the said malkhana on 09.12.2012 and as such he has nothing to do with the said office. Learned counsel has stated that the said charge was also not handed over to the applicant under normal circumstances as the lock was broken open as the earlier incharge not handed over the charge. Learned counsel has stated that even the list of the case property handed over to the applicant at the time of giving of charge to the applicant does not mention the said case property referred in the FIR as such he is entitled for anticipatory bail. Applicant has no criminal history. He has already been retired and has an unblemished record of police official. 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.
6. 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.
7. 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 Supreme Court.
8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Sudama Lal 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.
9. 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 :- 8.5.2024
Priya
(Krishan Pahal, J.)
