High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4106 of 2022 Applicant :- Rajendra Singh Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Prem Chandra Dwivedi Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
Legal Reasoning
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and Shri Prem Chandra Dwivedi, learned counsel for the informant/ complainant. This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the applicant (Rajendra Singh Chauhan) apprehending his arrest in Case Crime No.246 of 2017, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 406 I.P.C., Police Station-Shahganj, District-Agra. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story so narrated in the First Information Report (in short F.I.R.). Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted the present applicant is a Class-IV employee serving in the Department of Basic Education. The attention of this Court has been drawn towards Annexure No.1 of the application, which is an application preferred by the wife of the applicant to the Senior Superintendent of Police, District-Agra dated 27.06.2016 apprising that her husband, the applicant hereto, borrowed a sum of Rs.20,000/- from the informant for getting treatment and he returned the said amount to the informant with interest. After receiving the entire amount with interest, the informant having ulterior motive and extraneous design in his mind demanded Rs.50,000/- from the applicant and on the said demand the present applicant protested and said that since he has already returned the entire amount with interest then he should not ask for further amount of Rs.50,000/-. For that reason, the informant lodged the frivolous F.I.R. against the applicant on 27.04.2017. In the said F.I.R., the allegation against the present applicant has been levelled that he received a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- from the informant/ complainant time to time to get him appointed on the post of Night Peon in the office of the Basic Education, Agra. Neither the appointment was provided nor a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- was returned. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the prosecution story is highly improbable inasmuch as the informant/ complainant is saying himself as a poor person and seeking appointment on the post of Night Peon in the Department of Basic Education and for that appointment he has given a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- from time to time, which cannot be accepted and he has requested that Hon'ble High Court may ask from the informant/ complainant the source from which he has got a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- to make payment to the present applicant for getting appointment. Learned counsel for the applicant has also submitted that considering the allegations of the F.I.R. the matter was sent to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court where the parties appeared but the mediation could not be declared successful and the same was failed accordingly. Learned counsel for the applicant has enclosed the copy of the order-sheet of the learned court below which indicates that the non-bailable warrant has been issued against the present applicant on 06.12.2021 and since then in other three dates the non-bailable warrants have been issued against the present applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the learned court below without verifying the fact as to whether the summons and bailable warrants have been served upon the present applicant, issued non-bailable warrant against the present applicant, which is in violation of the dictum of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in re: Inder Mohan Goswami and another vs. State of Uttaranchal and others reported in (2007) 12 SCC 01. He has further submitted that as soon as the present applicant came to know about the issuance of non-bailable warrant, he filed anticipatory bail application before the learned Sessions Court and the said anticipatory bail application was rejected on the ground that non-bailable warrant has been issued against the present applicant and he has been declared absconder, therefore, in view of the dictum of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in re: Premshanker Prasad vs. State of Bihar and others reported in (2021) SCC Online SC 955 his anticipatory bail application may not be considered. Learned counsel for the applicant has also submitted that since the impugned F.I.R. is bogus, allegations thereof are false and misconceived, so he is willing to contest the proceedings but on account of non-bailable warrants being issued against him, he is apprehending his arrest. Therefore, learned counsel for the applicant has sought some protection of liberty of the present applicant. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate as well as learned counsel for the informant/ complainant have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the present applicant, but they could not dispute the aforesaid contention of learned counsel for the applicant. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits of the issue and considering the fact that the non-bailable warrant was firstly issued against the present applicant on 06.12.2021 and when he approached the learned Sessions Court by filing anticipatory bail application the process of non-bailable warrant was in operation, and this Court while invoking the powers under Section 438 Cr.P.C. may not quash and set aside the non- bailable warrant. However, prima-facie, it appears that before issuing non-bailable warrant the learned court below has not followed the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in re: Inder Mohan Goswami (supra), I hereby give liberty to the present applicant to file appropriate application seeking withdrawal or cancellation of non-bailable warrant issued against him within a period of four weeks and if such application is filed within the aforesaid stipulated time, the same may be considered and disposed of strictly in accordance with law. Till disposal of such application or the period of four weeks, whichever is earlier, the applicant may not be taken into custody in the aforesaid case crime number. However, it is made clear that if no such application is filed within the aforesaid stipulated time, the protection so given to the present applicant by this order, shall automatically be withdrawn.
Decision
In view of the above, the present anticipatory bail application is disposed of. Order Date :- 27.7.2022 [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Suresh Digitally signed by SURESH CHANDRA Date: 2022.07.27 17:40:04 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad