High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:154919 Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9161 of 2024 Applicant :- Foujiya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.
Legal Reasoning
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA and perused the material available on record. 2. The present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant - Foujiya in Case Crime No. 285 of 2024 under Section 3/5/8 Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station - Garhmukteshwar, District - Hapur. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the First Information Report was lodged against unknown person with regard to recovery of cow parts. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that applicant was not apprehended from the spot. The name of the applicant has surfaced in the confessional statement of the co-accused who was apprehended in another case. No incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. There is no previous criminal history of the applicant. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. It is further submitted by learned counsel for applicant that applicant is innocent and has no concern with the present matter. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. No prima facie case is made out against the applicant. If the applicant is enlarged on anticipatory bail, she will not misuse the liberty and cooperate with the investigation. The applicant has apprehension of her arrest by the police any time. 4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer but does not dispute the factual matrix. 5. It is not shown by learned AGA that the offence in question will have impact on society at large. It is not shown that act causes harm to the society. The accusations arise out of dispute between individuals. It is not shown by learned AGA that the nature and gravity of allegations are such that the same would disentitle the applicant for relief of anticipatory bail. Learned AGA has not raised concern that any prejudice would be caused to free, fair and full investigation in the event the applicant is granted anticipatory bail. No material, facts, circumstances or concern been shown by learned AGA for the State that the accused may tamper with the evidence or witnesses or accused is of such character that his mere presence at large would intimidate the witnesses or that accused will use his liberty to subvert justice or tamper with the evidence. 6. Learned Counsel for opposite parties has not placed any criminal antecedents of the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history. 7. It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned AGA for the State. 7-A. In the instant case, the evidence is the confessional statement of the co-accused while in custody of police. By virtue of the provisions of Section 25 of the Evidence Act, a confession made to a police officer under no circumstance is admissible in evidence against an accused. Inadmissibility of a confessional statement made to a police office under Section 25 of the Evidence Act is based on the ground of public policy. The object of inadmissibility in evidence of the confession is to ensure that the person accused of offence would not be induced by coercion, threat, or force to make confession and officer would make every effort to collect the evidence of the commission of crime apart from confession. Section 25 of the Evidence Act bars proof of admission of an offence by an accused to a police officer or made by him while in the custody of a police officer. Section 162 of the Criminal Procedure Code provides that no statement made by any person to a police officer in the course of an investigation shall be used as evidence. No other material or evidence has been shown by opposite party which would indicate the complicity of the applicant in the alleged crime.
Decision
8. In view of the above, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail in respect of offence described in para 2 of the present order. In the event of arrest of the applicant, she shall be released on anticipatory bail on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police office as and when required. (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 her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office. (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court concerned. (iv) In the event, the applicant changes residential address, the applicant shall inform the court concerned/Investigating Officer about new residential address in writing. (v) The applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and make herself available for interrogation whenever required. (vi) The applicant shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police. (vii) The applicant shall maintain law and order. (viii) The applicant shall at the time of execution of the bond, furnish his address and mobile number to investigating officer, and the court concerned. (ix) The applicant shall regularly remain present during the trial, and cooperate with the Court to complete the trial for the above offences. (x) Non presence of the applicant or her counsel before the court concerned shall be construed as violation of the present order and the court concerned would be at liberty to take coercive measures in accordance with law. 9. In case of default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant. 10. With the directions made above, the anticipatory bail application stands allowed. Order Date :- 23.9.2024 VMA