High Court · 2025

3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

4. Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the accused-applicant on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 228 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 352 and 323 I.P.C., Police Station Baghrai, District Pratapgarh.

5. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 16.01.2024, the following order was passed:- "1. Learned A.G.A. informs that in compliance of the order of this Court dated 10.01.2024 a communication was sent to the Superintendent of Police, Pratapgarh, however, no reply has been received so far. However, he has procured complete instructions in the matter including up-to-date case diary.

2. Heard Shri Ravi Shankar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. The instant application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Anupam Kumar Tripathi @ Anupam Kumar, in Case Crime No. 228 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 352 and 323 I.P.C., Police Station Baghrai, District Pratapgarh, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail, as he is apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant while pressing the anticipatory bail application submits that it is a case of false implication. No specific role of assault has been given to the applicant and general role of assault has been assigned to 11 persons named in the F.I.R. and only one injured, namely, Prinsu Pandey has sustained grievous injuries. It is vehemently submitted that the injuries sustained by the Prinsu Pandey has not been attributed to the applicant.

5. While drawing the attention of this Court towards a disability certificate, a copy of which is placed at Page no. 50 of the paper book, it is vehemently submitted that the applicant is 60% disabled, as his both lower limbs are not normal and by any stretch of imagination he may not participate in the 'marpeet'.

6. It is further submitted that the earlier investigating officer has not found any role of the applicant and, therefore, has endorsed his opinion in the case diary that the applicant may not be a privy to the incident which had allegedly occurred on 07.08.2022. Thus, protection from arrest may be granted to the applicant.

7. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand opposes the prayer of anticipatory bail of the applicant on the ground that he was amongst many other accused persons who has participated in the marpeet whereby many persons have sustained injuries including Prinsu Pandey, who has sustained grievous injuries. Thus, the applicant is not entitled for any protection.

8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it appears that the reliance has been placed by learned counsel for the applicant on a disability certificate issued by the concerned Chief Medical Officer, Pratapgarh, with regard to the 60% disability of the applicant pertaining to left lower limbs and it is on their basis of this certificate, it is argued with considerable force before this Court that by any stretch of imagination the applicant may not participate in the 'marpeet' and the earlier investigating officer has not found any role of the applicant in the incident and he has been arrayed as an accused only on account of previous enmity.

9. This Court vide order dated 10.01.2024 had directed the State to get the disability certificate issued in favour of the applicant verified by the Chief Medical Officer, Pratapgarh. However, no reply, despite a communication sent by the office of the Government Advocate to the Superintendent of Police, Pratapgarh, has been received so far. The investigation is stated to be pending.

10. Thus, it is provided that keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case and specifically taking into account the disability certificate issued in favour of the applicant, protection from arrest for a limited period of time may be granted to the applicant.

11. Issue notice to the opposite party no.2 returnable till the next date of listing.

12. Steps in this regard be taken by learned counsel for the applicant within three working days from today.

13. List this case on 31.01.2024.

14. In the meantime, the State shall get the disability certificate issued in favour of the applicant verified.

15. The office is also directed to send a copy of the disability certificate along with a copy of this order to the Chief Medical Officer, Pratapgarh for the purpose of verification and also for his opinion with regard to the nature of disability sustained by the applicant.

16. It is provided that till the next date of listing, in the event of arrest of the accused-applicant, namely,Anupam Kumar Tripathi @ Anupam Kumar involved in the above noted case, he shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail on his 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/Investigating Officer/Trial Court with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation or for discovery of any fact by a police officer as and when required; (2) 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (3) The applicant shall not leave the country concerned without the previous permission of the Court. "

6. From perusal of the order dated 16.01.2024, it transpires that State counsel has failed to demonstrate that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on an interim anticipatory bail after thorough considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to substantiate that the present applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceedings.

7. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Anupam Kumar Tripathi @ Anupam Kumar till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) 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; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

8. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. Order Date :- 27.1.2025 Mohd. Sharif MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

4. Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the accused-applicant on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 228 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 352 and 323 I.P.C., Police Station Baghrai, District Pratapgarh.

5. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 16.01.2024, the following order was passed:- "1. Learned A.G.A. informs that in compliance of the order of this Court dated 10.01.2024 a communication was sent to the Superintendent of Police, Pratapgarh, however, no reply has been received so far. However, he has procured complete instructions in the matter including up-to-date case diary.

2. Heard Shri Ravi Shankar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. The instant application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Anupam Kumar Tripathi @ Anupam Kumar, in Case Crime No. 228 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 352 and 323 I.P.C., Police Station Baghrai, District Pratapgarh, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail, as he is apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant while pressing the anticipatory bail application submits that it is a case of false implication. No specific role of assault has been given to the applicant and general role of assault has been assigned to 11 persons named in the F.I.R. and only one injured, namely, Prinsu Pandey has sustained grievous injuries. It is vehemently submitted that the injuries sustained by the Prinsu Pandey has not been attributed to the applicant.

5. While drawing the attention of this Court towards a disability certificate, a copy of which is placed at Page no. 50 of the paper book, it is vehemently submitted that the applicant is 60% disabled, as his both lower limbs are not normal and by any stretch of imagination he may not participate in the 'marpeet'.

6. It is further submitted that the earlier investigating officer has not found any role of the applicant and, therefore, has endorsed his opinion in the case diary that the applicant may not be a privy to the incident which had allegedly occurred on 07.08.2022. Thus, protection from arrest may be granted to the applicant.

7. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand opposes the prayer of anticipatory bail of the applicant on the ground that he was amongst many other accused persons who has participated in the marpeet whereby many persons have sustained injuries including Prinsu Pandey, who has sustained grievous injuries. Thus, the applicant is not entitled for any protection.

8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it appears that the reliance has been placed by learned counsel for the applicant on a disability certificate issued by the concerned Chief Medical Officer, Pratapgarh, with regard to the 60% disability of the applicant pertaining to left lower limbs and it is on their basis of this certificate, it is argued with considerable force before this Court that by any stretch of imagination the applicant may not participate in the 'marpeet' and the earlier investigating officer has not found any role of the applicant in the incident and he has been arrayed as an accused only on account of previous enmity.

9. This Court vide order dated 10.01.2024 had directed the State to get the disability certificate issued in favour of the applicant verified by the Chief Medical Officer, Pratapgarh. However, no reply, despite a communication sent by the office of the Government Advocate to the Superintendent of Police, Pratapgarh, has been received so far. The investigation is stated to be pending.

10. Thus, it is provided that keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case and specifically taking into account the disability certificate issued in favour of the applicant, protection from arrest for a limited period of time may be granted to the applicant.

11. Issue notice to the opposite party no.2 returnable till the next date of listing.

12. Steps in this regard be taken by learned counsel for the applicant within three working days from today.

13. List this case on 31.01.2024.

14. In the meantime, the State shall get the disability certificate issued in favour of the applicant verified.

15. The office is also directed to send a copy of the disability certificate along with a copy of this order to the Chief Medical Officer, Pratapgarh for the purpose of verification and also for his opinion with regard to the nature of disability sustained by the applicant.

16. It is provided that till the next date of listing, in the event of arrest of the accused-applicant, namely,Anupam Kumar Tripathi @ Anupam Kumar involved in the above noted case, he shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail on his 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/Investigating Officer/Trial Court with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation or for discovery of any fact by a police officer as and when required; (2) 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (3) The applicant shall not leave the country concerned without the previous permission of the Court. "

6. From perusal of the order dated 16.01.2024, it transpires that State counsel has failed to demonstrate that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on an interim anticipatory bail after thorough considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to substantiate that the present applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceedings.

7. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Anupam Kumar Tripathi @ Anupam Kumar till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) 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; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

8. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. Order Date :- 27.1.2025 Mohd. Sharif MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench