High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:157468 Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9545 of 2024 Applicant :- Shadab And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Pandey,Sandeep Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.
Legal Reasoning
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants 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 applicants - Shadab and Ahsan in Case Crime No. 308 of 2024, under Sections 323, 388, 406, 506 I.P.C., Police Station - Didoli, District - J.P. Nagar (Amroha). 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that applicant no.1 Shadab was having affair with informant Amir and when the applicant no.1 was exploited, FIR has been lodged against aforesaid informant and family members. It is submitted that in view of the fact that previous FIR was lodged on behalf of applicants, present FIR has been lodged in order to harass the applicants. It is submitted that although applicants are proceeded under Section 388 IPC, however, no amount has been paid by informant. There is only allegation of demand of Rs.20,00,000/-. It is submitted that at best, offence under Section 385 IPC would be made out against applicants, which is bailable in nature. Applicants have been over implicated. It is further submitted that applicants are being falsely prosecuted in order to put pressure for withdrawal of previous criminal litigation. Applicants have no criminal history. 3.-A. It is further submitted by learned counsel for applicants that applicants are innocent and have no concern with the present matter. Allegations levelled against the applicants are false. It is further argued that applicants' case is squarely covered under Section 438 Cr.P.C. No prima facie case is made out against the applicants. If the applicants are enlarged on anticipatory bail, they will not misuse the liberty and cooperate with the investigation. The applicants have apprehension of their 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 applicants 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 applicants are 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 applicants 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. It is settled principle of law that a person who is accused of committing criminal offence is required to prosecuted in respect of the act committed by him. Over-implication of an accused refers to situations where an individual is unduly or excessively implicated in a crime or wrongdoing. Such over implication may be based on external influence or false accusations. It is crucial for the justice delivery system to balance the need to hold perpetrators accountable with protecting the rights of the accused. Prosecuting a person for a higher offence than the offence committed by accused would be violative of Article 21 of the Constitution. It is important that the rule of law prevail and the prosecution of an accused is based on objective assessment of the material and circumstances. 8. In view of above, applicants are granted anticipatory bail in respect of offence described in para 2 of the present order. In the event of arrest of the applicants, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their 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 applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police office as and when required. (ii) 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 themselves from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office. (iii) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court concerned. (iv) In the event, applicants change residential address, the applicants shall inform the court concerned/Investigating Officer about new residential address in writing. (v) The applicants shall cooperate with the investigation and make themselves available for interrogation whenever required. (vi) The applicants 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 applicants shall maintain law and order. (viii) The applicants shall at the time of execution of the bond, furnish their address and mobile number to investigating officer, and the court concerned. (ix) The applicants 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 applicants or their 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 applicants. 10. With the directions made above, the anticipatory bail application stands allowed. Order Date :- 26.9.2024 D. Tamang