Allahabad High Court
Mukesh Dwivedi vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. on 6 January, 2025
Author: Karunesh Singh Pawar
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:786
Court No. - 16
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2296 of 2024
Applicant :- Mukesh Dwivedi
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Prakash Awasthi,Aadarsh Mishra,Vashu Deo Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. apprehending his arrest in F.I.R./case crime No.322 of 2024 under sections 147, 148, 149, 160, 188, 268, 307, 323, 325, 336, 352, 427, 504, 506 I.P.C., 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932, P.S. PGI, district Lucknow East, Commissionerate- Lucknow.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The coordinate Bench of this Court while granting interim protection to the applicant vide order dated 03.10.2024 has passed the following order:-
"1.The present anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.322 of 2024 under sections 147, 148, 149, 160, 188, 268, 307, 323, 325, 336, 352, 427, 504, 506 I.P.C., 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932, P.S. PGI, district Lucknow East, Commissionerate- Lucknow.
2.Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
3.It is alleged in the prosecution case that on 14.5.2024, stone pelting was taking place between the two rival groups. It was a free fight. The complainant side was the aggressor.
4.Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the complainant side was the aggressor, which is evident from the finding recorded by the Sessions Court while granting bail to Pramod Upadhyay, Satyam Tiwari, Jaideep Tiwari, Onkar Nath Pandey and Virendra Kumar. It is submitted that from the side of the applicant, three persons are inured whereas no one was injured from the complainant side. The applicant's both the legs have been broken. Injury report of the injured is on record. Instead of arresting the culprits from the other side, police has made the applicant as an escape goat.
Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation.
5.Learned Addl. Government Advocate has opposed the prayer made by applicant's counsel but could not show that the complainant side has received any injury.
6.List on 7.11.2024. In the meantime, learned A.G.A. shall file objections/counter affidavit.
8.Considering the above aspects of the matter, injury report of the applicant as also the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he will cooperate in the investigation/trial, prima facie no one appears to be injured from the side of the complainant, charge sheet has been filed against the co-accused persons, prima facie it appears that the applicant may not have committed the offence, injury caused on the applicant side, perusal of the record, as also 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 protection to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
9.In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the investigating officer.
10.The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation/trial and he will not influence the witnesses.
In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this order."
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that charge sheet in the matter has been filed. The applicant has cooperated in the investigation and further undertakes to cooperate in the trial. The applicant has filed the bonds.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.
On due consideration to the submission advanced by the parties as well as considering the fact that prima facie there is no one injured from the side of the complainant; the applicant may not have committed the offence; he has cooperated in the investigation and further undertakes to cooperate in the trial, the interim protection granted by this Court vide order dated 03.10.2024 is made absolute in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.
In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed.
Order Date :- 6.1.2025
R.C.
