Allahabad High Court
Jay Prakash vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. ... on 20 November, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:76776
Court No. - 15
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2187 of 2024
Applicant :- Jay Prakash
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Pandey,Rohit Upadhyay
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.76/2024, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C., P.S. Katka, District Ambedkar Nagar.
From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 23.09.2024 following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:-
"The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.76/2024, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C., P.S. Katka, District Ambedkar Nagar.
Learned AGA has informed that notices to the complainant are served.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State. None appears on behalf of the complainant.
In the prosecution case it is alleged that on 13.04.2024 at about 07:00 pm daughter of Anita was going to take the cow dung cakes on the way Radheyshyam who was in intoxicated situation after catching hand of victim started molesting her. Victim returned home and told the incident to her family. The complainant and victim went to the house of Radheyshyam and complained about it then accused persons have badly beaten the injured by hurling abuses with lathi and danda. Anita was dragged inside the house and badly beaten due to which she suffered head injury. Apart from her two others have also suffered injuries.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the statement of victim specific role of causing injury to the injured-Anita is of co-accused Radheyshyam. The allegation of molestation is also on Radheyshyam. Others have been assigned general role. There are three injured in this case. All the injured have received simple injuries. Anita Devi has not suffered any fracture nor the other two injured persons. Against the applicant only general role has been assigned.
He submits that charge-sheet against the applicant has not been filed under POCSO Act however, the same has been filed against the co-accused Radheyshyam. The role of the applicant is distinct from the co-accused Radheyshyam.
Perused the record so also the injury report, the statement of the doctor which shows that injured have received simple injures.
Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the trial.
Learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. have opposed the bail application. Learned counsel for the complainant prays for a week's time to file objections.
List on 01.10.2024 after connecting with CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. Nos. - 2155 of 2024, 2188 of 2024 and 2185 of 2024.
On due consideration to the argument advanced as well as perusal of the record and the fact that applicant has no criminal history and has cooperated in the investigation and charge-sheet has been filed and has undertaken to cooperate in the trial 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 on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(1) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial and he will not influence the witnesses.
(2) The accused-applicant will remain present on each and every date fixed by the trial court.
(3) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court."
State counsel has failed to demonstrate from the counter affidavit that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on anticipatory bail after thorough considering the merits of the case. It has also not been pleaded by counsel for the State that the present applicant is not cooperating with the trial proceedings.
In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby disposed of while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant namely, Jay Prakash, till disposal of the trial subject to 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 the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and
(v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.
In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection.
Order Date :- 20.11.2024
Ashutosh
