High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 77 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12413 of 2021 Applicant :- Mobin Ali Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Legal Reasoning
Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 142 of 2018, under Sections 306 IPC, Police Station Chhatta, District Agra with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail. On 25.06.2021, the following order has been passed:- "1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State through video conference. 2. This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant - Mobin Ali, seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.142 of 2018, under Sections-306, I.P.C., Police Station-Chhatta, District- Agra, during pendency of trial. 3. Put up this case on 13.08.2021, in the additional cause list before the appropriate Bench. By the said date, counter affidavit be filed by learned A.G.A. 4. At present, there are no criminal antecedents of the applicant shown as also no real apprehension has been expressed by the State of the applicant fleeing from justice, if the present application is allowed. 5. While the bail application has been opposed by learned AGA, Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a serving police personnel. The FIR allegations are completely false. The wife of the deceased was only working part time for the applicant and cooking meals for him. Even otherwise if the FIR allegations are taken to be true, no offence under Section 306 I.P.C. may ever be made out against the applicant. The reference is also made to the fact other than having issued a challan against the deceased, the applicant is not stated to have committed any act as may have amount to abetment to suicide. 6. Thus, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled to interim anticipatory bail in this case, at this stage. 7. In the event of arrest of the applicant -Mobin Ali , involved in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on interim anticipatory bail till the next date fixed, on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned OR before the court concerned on the following conditions: (i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer/by the court as may be the case. (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 or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court. (iv) In default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant." Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is facing trial and will not seek unnecessary adjournment. The statement of PW-1 has been recorded. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant has also been touched upon at length. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant undertake that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants, the applicant are liable to to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
Decision
In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Mobin Ali be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/court concerned with the following conditions:- 1. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; 2. that 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; 3. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; 4. that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; 5. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; 6. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; 7. that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial. Order Date :- 20.1.2023 Arti Digitally signed by :- ARTI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad