High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:108231 Court No. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5273 of 2024 Applicant :- Girwar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Bhanu Prakash Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Legal Reasoning
Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. 2. This is the second application for anticipatory bail filed by applicant - Girwar in connection with Case Crime No.84 of 2023, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 308, 506 IPC, Police Station Chhata, District Mathura. 3. As per F.I.R. version, on 13.3.2023 at about 7:15 A.M., the named accused persons came to the house of the informant taking lathi, sword, sickle and axe in their hands and made an assault upon the informant and his family members, who sustained grievous injuries. F.I.R. was lodged on 17.3.2023 and investigation started and now charge-sheet has been submitted in the matter. 4. It is submitted that the first anticipatory bail application was disposed of by this Court on the ground that the applicant has no apprehension of arrest but however liberty was given to the applicant that if charge sheet is filed before the Court concerned and cognizance is taken, he will be at liberty to file appropriate application as per provisions of law. It is also submitted that now charge sheet has been submitted against the present applicant and other co-accused persons and in the light of the order passed by this court on 1.3.2024 the present anticipatory bail application has been moved. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. It is further submitted that in the F.I.R., role assigned to the applicant is that with the aid of an axe, he made an assault upon the injured persons. It is further submitted that there is no injury to any of the injured persons which may be caused by use of axe. Except one injury to injured Dinesh, all the injured persons sustained simple injuries. No specific role of assault has been assigned to the present applicant in the F.I.R. of the case. It is further submitted that during the course of investigation, notice under section 41-A Cr.P.C. was issued to applicant and he was cooperative with the investigation. It is further submitted that co- accused Smt. Kiran has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7572 of 2023 by order dated 7.7.2023. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail. 5. Learned A.G.A., on the other hand, opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail, but however could not dispute the factual position as submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant. 6. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record. 7. In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the controversy finally by holding the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial. It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial. It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion. 8. In Aman Preet Singh vs. C.B.I. through Director, AIR 2021 Supreme Court 4154, the Hon'ble Apex Court has clearly held that if a person, who is an accused in a non-bailable/cognizable offence, was not taken into custody during the period of investigation, in such a case, it is appropriate that he may be released on bail as the circumstances of his having not been arrested during investigation or not being produced in custody is itself sufficient to entitle him/her to be released on bail. 9. Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till end of the trial in the matter. 10. The anticipatory bail application is allowed accordingly. 11. In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till end of the trial on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with 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 before the court concerned on the date fixed in the matter; (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 / her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned. 12. In case of default of any of the conditions, same may be a ground for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant. Order Date :- 4.7.2024 safi