High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:198507 Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11335 of 2023
Legal Reasoning
Applicant :- Avish And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajesh Kumar Simgh Chaudhary Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Vakalatnama filed today by Shri Rajesh K.S. Chaudhary, Advocate for the opposite party no.3 is taken on record. 2. This application has been moved on behalf of the applicants Avish, Amit, Arjun and Yogesh seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.480 of 2023, under Sections 147, 307, 506 IPC, P.S. Tappal, District Aligarh. 3. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no.3 as well as the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against them. Allegations levelled against the applicants are false. It is further submitted that the whole prosecution story narrated in the F.I.R. is false and concocted. In the present case no injury has been caused to the informant and his friend whereas it is alleged in the F.I.R. that several persons with intention to kill opened fire with pistol. It is also submitted that there is no medical report of any so-called injured on the record. It is further submitted that no CCTV footage has been collected by the Investigating Officer during investigation. F.I.R. has been lodged belatedly without any plausible explanation regarding delay. Applicants have no criminal history. The investigation of the case is going-on and they have been cooperative with the same. It has been submitted that in case applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.3 have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but however could not dispute this factual aspect that no injury has been caused to the informant or his friend. 6. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. 7. From the perusal of the record it reveals that the named accused persons alongwith 6-7 unknown persons came with three vehicles and opened fire upon the informant and his friend but anyhow they rescued and in the CCTV footage whole incident was recorded. F.I.R. was lodged on 10.9.2023 and investigation started which is still going on. It also reveals from the perusal of the record that no injury has been inflicted upon the informant or any other person. Applicants have been cooperative during investigation so far. 8. In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held 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. 9. In Siddharth Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, (2022) 1 Supreme Court Cases 676, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that personal liberty is an important aspect of our constitutional mandate. The occasion to arrest an accused during investigation arises when custodial investigation becomes necessary or it is a heinous crime or where there is a possibility of influencing the witnesses or accused may abscond. Merely because an arrest can be made because it is lawful does not mandate that arrest must be made. A distinction must be made between the existence of the power to arrest and the justification for exercise of it. If arrest is made routine, it can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self-esteem of a person. If the Investigating Officer has no reason to believe that the accused will abscond or disobey summons and has, in fact, throughout cooperated with the investigation, then there is no compulsion on the officer to arrest the accused. 10. Considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, nature of accusation, role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicants till filing of police report under Section 173(2) CrPC before the Competent Court. 11. The application is allowed accordingly. 12. In the event of arrest of the applicants in the aforesaid case crime, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer concerned with the following conditions :- i. The applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. iii. The applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. iv. The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected. v. The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned. 13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail of applicants in accordance with law. Order Date :- 13.10.2023 safi Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad