Allahabad High Court
Rakesh Kapoor vs State Of U.P. on 9 May, 2024
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:83593
Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4030 of 2024
Applicant :- Rakesh Kapoor
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ahsan Ahmad,Daya Ram Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Ahsan Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, 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 No.4864 of 2007 registered under Sections 16, 17, 17A, 17B, 18, 18B, 18C Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 at Police Station- Nauchandi, District Meerut with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, several medicines, which were being manufactures at the factory of the applicant, were found mis-branded by the officials of the department, as such FIR No.428 of 2007 was instituted against the applicant and other co-accused persons and subsequently, the instant case has also been filed.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The Magistrate concerned vide order dated 22.7.2019 has discharged the owner of the factory and the applicant being the director in the company has not been discharged by the same order. The applicant was assigned the job of marketing of the said drugs, as such he has nothing to do with the said manufacturing of the said drugs.
6. 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. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicant except the said FIR. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. The applicant is ready to cooperate during trial as he has cooperate during the trial of the said case also, failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
7. 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.
8. 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 theSupreme Court.
9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant-Rakesh Kapoor be released forthwith in the aforesaid case (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 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;
(ii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iii). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(iv). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(v). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
10. 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 :- 9.5.2024
Ravi Kant
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
