Allahabad High Court
Ravi Shankar vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home ... on 10 May, 2024
Author: Rajeev Singh
Bench: Rajeev Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:36356
Court No. - 8
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1931 of 2022
Applicant :- Ravi Shankar
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Dept. Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Pandey,Sandhya Bharti
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anish Srivastava Lall
Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to grant him anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 215 of 2022 under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 I.P.C., Police Station- Chowk, District- Lucknow.
3. The case is taken up in the revised list, but none appears for the complainant.
4. It is informed by learned counsel for the applicant that information was given to the Shri Anish Srivastava Lall about the listing of the case and today during the period of lunch time, several attempts were made by making phone calls but the same were not received by him. Thus, this application is being decided after hearing learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case as a civil suit is pending in relation to the property in question. He further submits that only with the intention to make pressure on the applicant, F.I.R. of the case in question was lodged by the informant. He further submits that interim anticipatory bail has been granted to the applicant on 21.02.2023.
6. Further submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that one another F.I.R. was lodged by the informant of the present case by implicating the applicant, but the applicant never misused the liberty of interim anticipatory bail and he is always ready to cooperate the police as well as the trial court. He further submits that co-accused, namely, Mahesh Ramesh Giri alias Ramesh Giri has already been granted anticipatory bail in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. No. 1287 of 2023 vide order dated 30.05.2023, hence, the applicant is also entitled for regular anticipatory bail.
7. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer of the applicant, but he does not dispute the fact that interim anticipatory bail was granted to the applicant vide order dated 21.02.2023.
8. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of the bail application, F.I.R., the order dated 21.02.2023 by which interim anticipatory bail was granted to the applicant as well as other relevant enclosures, the order dated 21.02.2023 is being reproduced as under:
"The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. No. 0215 of 2022 under Sections 406, 420, 467 and 468 I.P.C., Police Station Chowk, District Lucknow.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the dispute between the informant and the applicant as well as other co-accused persons is regarding the management of the trust. The applicant was appointed as priest by the co-accused Ramesh Giri. A petition filed by the co-accused Ramesh agaisnt the constitution of the trust has been allowed by the Patna High Court vide order dated 4.3.2010 A copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-5 to the affidavit filed in support of the this application. The civil suit regarding dispute of trust has been filed by the co-accused Ramesh Giri and others before the District Judge, Lucknow, which is pending. He submits that the applicant has no criminal history. The dispute is purely civil in nature and has already engaging attention of the competent civil court. Investigation is going on. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation.
Learned Addl. Government Advocate prays for and is allowed fifteen days' time to file counter affidavit.
List on 3.4.2023.
On due consideration to the argument advanced; perusal of the record; and the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent; he is a priest in a temple; there is a dispute regarding the management of the trust which is pending before the competent authority; investigation is going on; and also considering the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant interim protection to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail in the aforesaid F.I.R. number, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned.
The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witness. The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer /I.O./ S.H.O. concerned call (s) for investigation/interrogation. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court."
It is evident that there is no evidence that the applicant misused the liberty of interim anticipatory bail granted to him.
9. In view of above, the bail application is allowed and the applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail and in case the applicant is taken into custody by the Investigating Officer/Investigating Agency, then he shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail after taking personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned,with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.
(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 District concerned without the previous permission of the court.
Order Date :- 10.5.2024
Arpan
