Allahabad High Court
Arshad Ansari vs State Of U.P. And Another on 22 May, 2024
Author: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:92160
Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5126 of 2024
Applicant :- Arshad Ansari
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Afzal Ahmad Khan Durrani, Rohit Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1. Supplementary affidavit has been filed today, is taken on record.
2. Heard Mr. Afzal Ahmad Khan Durrani, learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
3. This anticipatory bail application (under Section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case No.408 of 2020 arising out of Case Crime No.758 of 2019, under Sections 306, 500, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Chandpur, District Bijnor.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case just to harass the applicant in fact no such incident has taken place as alleged in the impugned FIR. The applicant has never committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. During investigation, no credible evidence was found against the applicant, hence, submitted final report but the court below has taken cognizance upon the final report and has summoned the applicant in a routine manner. He further submits that it is very surprising that deceased died at 6.00 pm whereas the alleged post was send to the Facebook Portal at 6.23 pm which itself creates doubt about truthiness of the the prosecution story. He drawn attention of the Court towards recovery of alleged mobile phone from which a suicidal post was sent on Facebook, which is recovered on 07.11.2019 whereas the impugned FIR has been lodged on 31.10.2019. He further submits that the impugned FIR has been lodged only just to grab the money from the applicant. Till date no NBW has been issued and only summon has been issued against the applicant.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that from perusal of the impugned FIR, it cannot be inferred that applicant in any manner had ever instigated or abetted the deceased to commit suicide. Except general allegation, there is no other evidence available on record to show that essential ingredients of Section 107 IPC can be attracted, therefore, it cannot be said that present appellant had instigated, provoked, incited, urged or encouraged the deceased to commit the suicide. Essential ingredients of the offence under Section 306 IPC are completely missing even the contents of abetment of suicide have not been there as provided under Section 107 IPC. Prima facie no alleged offence is made out against the applicant. The applicant is having previous criminal history, which has been explained.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant-Arshad Ansari, 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 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.
(iii) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(iv) 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.
(v) 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.
(vi) 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.
9. 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.
10. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application is disposed of.
Order Date :- 22.5.2024
Ajeet
