High Court

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Shri G.K. Kamil, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. The present application under Section 438 CrPC has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 242 of 2024, under Sections 318(4), 319 (2), 336(3), 338, 340(2) of the B.N.S. 2023 and 63/65 Copy Right Act 1957, Police Station Kandhai, District Pratapgarh. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 18.11.2024, following order was passed wherein the present applicants have been granted interim anticipatory bail:- “Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to release them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0325 of 2020, under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the IPC, Police Station-Alapur, District-Ambedkar Nagar. Contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated. He added that the present first information report has been lodged while concealing the material facts as earlier one application under section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. was instituted, which was dismissed, and thereafter, the brother of the applicants has also instituted an application under section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. for the same incident, that too was dismissed and the revision has also been dismissed. He added that these facts have not been brought into the knowledge of the authorities concerned. Further added that the first information report has already been lodged by one of the accused person on 11-03-2015 for the same property and the writ petition is pending. He submits that the applicants themselves are the victims and by lodging the first information report, the pressure is being mounted over the applicants, so that they cannot pursue their criminal cases registered against them. He also added that the applicants are cooperating in the trial proceedings and they undertake that they will never abscond and would always cooperate in the trial proceedings as well as in the investigation proceedings. He next submits that there is an acute apprehension that the police will arrest the applicants, without there being no fault on their part and thus, submission is that the applicants may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the allegations are serious in nature and as such, the applicants are not entitled for any relief, though, he has failed to substantiate his argument that the applicants are not cooperating with the investigation proceedings. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, this Court finds it a fit case for grant of interim anticipatory bail. Accordingly, till the next date of listing, the present applicants- Rammani & Ram Ani @ Ramdhani, shall be released forthwith, in case of their arrest, in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on their furnishing personal bonds and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that the applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that in case chargesheet is submitted, the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; (v) that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness; (vi) that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. Let notice be issued to opposite party no. 2 returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week. If the steps are taken, the office shall proceed accordingly. List/put up this matter in the week commencing 06.01.2025. In the meantime, learned counsel for the State as well as opposite party no. 2 shall file their counter affidavits.” State counsel has failed to demonstrate from the counter affidavit that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the anticipatory bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on anticipatory bail after thorough considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicants are not cooperating with the investigation proceedings or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicants, namely, Rammani & Ram Ani @ Ramdhani till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that the applicants 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 applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicants 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 order. Order Date :- 6.3.2025 Shravan

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Shri G.K. Kamil, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. The present application under Section 438 CrPC has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 242 of 2024, under Sections 318(4), 319 (2), 336(3), 338, 340(2) of the B.N.S. 2023 and 63/65 Copy Right Act 1957, Police Station Kandhai, District Pratapgarh. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 18.11.2024, following order was passed wherein the present applicants have been granted interim anticipatory bail:- “Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to release them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0325 of 2020, under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the IPC, Police Station-Alapur, District-Ambedkar Nagar. Contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated. He added that the present first information report has been lodged while concealing the material facts as earlier one application under section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. was instituted, which was dismissed, and thereafter, the brother of the applicants has also instituted an application under section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. for the same incident, that too was dismissed and the revision has also been dismissed. He added that these facts have not been brought into the knowledge of the authorities concerned. Further added that the first information report has already been lodged by one of the accused person on 11-03-2015 for the same property and the writ petition is pending. He submits that the applicants themselves are the victims and by lodging the first information report, the pressure is being mounted over the applicants, so that they cannot pursue their criminal cases registered against them. He also added that the applicants are cooperating in the trial proceedings and they undertake that they will never abscond and would always cooperate in the trial proceedings as well as in the investigation proceedings. He next submits that there is an acute apprehension that the police will arrest the applicants, without there being no fault on their part and thus, submission is that the applicants may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the allegations are serious in nature and as such, the applicants are not entitled for any relief, though, he has failed to substantiate his argument that the applicants are not cooperating with the investigation proceedings. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, this Court finds it a fit case for grant of interim anticipatory bail. Accordingly, till the next date of listing, the present applicants- Rammani & Ram Ani @ Ramdhani, shall be released forthwith, in case of their arrest, in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on their furnishing personal bonds and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that the applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that in case chargesheet is submitted, the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; (v) that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness; (vi) that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. Let notice be issued to opposite party no. 2 returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week. If the steps are taken, the office shall proceed accordingly. List/put up this matter in the week commencing 06.01.2025. In the meantime, learned counsel for the State as well as opposite party no. 2 shall file their counter affidavits.” State counsel has failed to demonstrate from the counter affidavit that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the anticipatory bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on anticipatory bail after thorough considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicants are not cooperating with the investigation proceedings or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicants, namely, Rammani & Ram Ani @ Ramdhani till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that the applicants 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 applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicants 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 order. Order Date :- 6.3.2025 Shravan