Chhotu v. State of U.P., hence, this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:142555 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 6152 of 2025 Applicant :- Rohit Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raghavendra Rai,Vijay Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.
Legal Reasoning
Prior notice of this bail application was served in the office of Government Advocate and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P., hence, this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned A.G.A. as per Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. (U. P. Amendment) is not required. The FIR of this incident was lodged against co-accused persons whose emails are detailed in the report and allegations against them are that they are indulged in doing offences like fraud, anti national activities, threat to life, threat to involve and implicate in false cases, criminal breach of trust, threat to kill and also allegation is that they are involved in smuggling of contraband/narcotics/weapons/explosives. Besides this, they do cheating, extortion of money, black bail and evasion of tax/GST etc. causing loss of revenue to the State as well as Central Government. It is also mentioned in the FIR that accused Deepak Sharma, his wife and his other anti national and anti- social associates are wanted by police in other States too. A request in the FIR was made to investigate the matter and take legal action against the named accused persons. Learned counsel for the applicant submit that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submitted that the applicant is and the applicant has been nominated in this matter just to injure the reputation of the applicant by having him so arrested. He submitted that no proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. have been initiated against applicant. He submitted that charge sheet has not been filed till date. He submitted that applicant undertake to cooperate during investigation and he will not tamper with the evidence in any way. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant. After considering the rival submissions, this Court finds that there is a case registered against the applicant. It cannot be definitely said when the police may apprehend them. After lodging of F.I.R, the arrest can be made by the police at will. There is no definite period fixed for the police to arrest an accused against whom an F.I.R has been lodged. The courts have repeatedly held that arrest should be the last option for the police and it should be restricted to those exceptional cases where arresting the accused is imperative or his custodial interrogation is required. Irrational and indiscriminate arrests are gross violation of human rights. In the case of Joginder Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1994 SC 1349, the Apex Court has referred to the third report of National Police Commission wherein it is mentioned that arrests by the police in India is one of the chief source of corruption in the police. The report suggested that, by and large, nearly 60 percent of the arrests were either unnecessary or unjustified and that such unjustified police action accounted for 43.2 percent of expenditure of the jails. Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental right and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative. According to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the arrest of an accused should be made. The learned counsel has also place reliance on the order dated 28.7.2021 passed by the The Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 5191 of 2021 Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, in which the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that prima facie, we cannot appreciate why in such a scenario is there a requirement for the petitioner being sent to custody. Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicants, considering that accusation might have been lodged with the object of injuring the reputation of the applicant by having him so arrested, considering the judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98 and in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 5191 of 2021. In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant Rohit involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail till submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court/ Investigating Officer concerned with the following conditions:- 1.The applicant shall, at the time of execution of the bond, furnish his address and mobile number and shall not change the residence till the conclusion of investigation/ trial without informing the Investigating Officer of the police/ the Court concerned of change of address and the reasons for the same before changing the same. 2. The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial/ investigation by police without prior permission from the concerned trial Court. 3. The applicant shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not play mischeif with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the Investigating Officer of the police; 4. The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court/ Investigating Officer forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court/ Investigating Officer till the investigation is completed. In case he has no passport, he will file his affidavit before the Court/ Investigating Officer concerned in this regard. 5. 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; 6. The applicant shall maintain law and order. 7. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant. 8. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98 and the Government Advocate/informant/complainant can file bail cancellation application." 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and his name surfaced during the course of investigation. The applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. He has been falsely implicated in the present case. Investigation has been completed. The applicant had cooperated in the investigation. Charge-sheet has been submitted. No custodial interrogation is required. The applicant has been summoned by the court concerned. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case. 5. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 6. Having regard to the submissions made, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant and, in particular, the fact that the applicant was not named in the first information report and his name surfaced during the course of investigation; investigation has been completed; the applicant had cooperated in the investigation; no custodial interrogation is required; and, no violation of conditions or misuse of liberty of anticipatory bail has been pointed out by learned AGA, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 7. In the event of arrest, the applicant- Rohit, involved in the aforesaid case crime, be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall make himself available on each and every date fixed in the matter by the court concerned; (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 from disclosing such facts to the Court; (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the concerned court. 8. Further, in default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.
Arguments
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State- opposite party, and perused the material available on record. 2. This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 166 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Pakbara, District Moradabad. 3. During the pendency of investigation, the applicant was granted anticipatory bail till the submission of police report by this Court vide order dated 07.05.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 3732 of 2022, Rohit v. State of U.P. The said order reads as under: "Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.166 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Pakbara, district Moradabad, during pendency of investigation/trial.
Decision
9. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 20.8.2025 SKT/- Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad