High Court · 2025 on 18 Jul 2025

Judgment

1. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant in Court today, is taken on record. Office is directed to register the same.

2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail

in Case No.66 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No.80 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 327, 332, 333, 336, 353, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station-Barhpura, District-Etawah with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail, till conclusion of trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the third anticipatory bail application of the applicant. The first anticipatory bail application of the applicant has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 31.01.2023 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No.17456 of 2021, after which, second anticipatory has been filed, which has been dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated on 08.05.2025 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No.3560 of 2025. He submits that charge sheet was submitted on 28.12.202,1 and cognizance has been taken on

28.02.2024. He further submits that co-accused Chhotu @ Bhanu Pratap has been granted anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 30.09.2021 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No.15884 of 2021, prior to submission of charge sheet and also granted anticipatory bail on 03.01.2022 after submission of charge sheet in the aforesaid anticipatory bail application. He further submits that co-accused Ravi Singh Bhadauriya was granted anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.10.2021, in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 Cr.P.C. No.15879 of 2021 on 23.05.2025, prior to submission of the charge sheet and also granted Anticipatory Bail on

23.05.2025, in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 Cr.P.C. No.3848 of 2025 after submission of charge sheet, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for the same. The bail orders of the aforesaid co-accused persons have been annexed in the supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant in Court today.

4. Learned counsel for the State submits that second bail application of the applicant was rejected after submission of the charge sheet. No ground has been shown to suggest that there is an apprehension of arrest, as the charge sheet has been submitted in the year 2021 wherein cognizance has been taken in the year 2024. Even otherwise, the anticipatory bail application of the co-accused has been granted without mentioning the fact that the charge sheet has already been submitted and in case of co-accused Ravi Singh Bhadauriya the order dated 23.02.2023 passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court wherein his anticipatory bail application was rejected in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No.15879 of 2021, has not been disclosed. The Court concerned while rejecting the anticipatory bail of the co-accused Ravi Singh Bhadauriya, had also directed the applicant to surrender within ten days from that date of the order and to apply for regular bail.

5. In order to make disposal of this application, it is relevant to mention Section 438 Cr.P.C., which is reproduced herein below:- "438. Direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest. 2 (1) When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non- bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on bail. (2) When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction under sub- section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it may think fit, including- (i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) a condition that the person 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; (iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; (iv) such other condition as may be imposed under sub- section (3) of section 437, as if the bail were granted under that section. (3) If such person is thereafter arrested without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station on such accusation, and is prepared either at the time of arrest or at any time while in the custody of such officer to give bail, be shall be released on bail; and if a Magistrate taking cognizance of such offence decides that a warrant should issue in the first instance against that person, he shall issue a bailable warrant in conformity with the direction of the Court under sub- section (1)."

6. From the record, it appears that there is no apprehension of arrest of the applicant nor anything has been averred in the affidavit with regard to threat or apprehension of arrest of the applicant.

7. In the light of above, looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, taking into consideration the role assigned to the applicant as per prosecution case, gravity and nature of accusation as well as reasons mentioned above, this court is of the view that no case for exercising its discretionary power under section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure is made out in favour of applicant. 3

8. Accordingly this anticipatory bail application under section 438 Cr.P.C. is rejected. Interim order, if any, stands discharged.

9. The applicant is at liberty to apply for regular bail.

10. It is open to the Court/authority concerned to proceed in accordance with law. Order Date :- 18.7.2025 Rahul. RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad 4