Suneet Kumar @ Moola v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9873 of 2023 Applicant :- Suneet Kumar @ Moola Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Prakash,Sunil Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶1This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant Suneet Kumar @ Moola seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 556 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 120-B IPC, Police Station Khair, District Aligarh.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶3It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of his arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. It is further submitted that no firearm injury has been inflicted upon the injured Ravendra Kumar. It is also submitted that the informant of this case has also not sustained any injury. It further submitted that the applicant was not present on the spot at the time of occurrence. It is next submitted that applicant has no criminal history. The investigation of the case is going on and the applicant is cooperating with the Investigating Officer. It has been submitted that in case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶4Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that serious and grievous injuries have been caused to the injured Ravendra Kumar. The doctor has found head injury and has also stated that the injuries found on the body of the injured Ravendra Kumar are serious in nature. The applicant has actively participated in commission of the crime and with intention to kill injury has been caused upon the injured Ravendra Kumar.

¶5In this matter, from the perusal of the record it reveals that nine named and some unknown accused persons made an assault upon the informant and his brother with the aid of pistol. The fire made upon the informant missed but however his brother Ravendra Kumar sustained firearm injuries. F.I.R. was lodged on 27.7.2023 and investigation started, which is still going on. It also reveals from the perusal of the record that the applicant has actively participated in commission of the crime. The injured has received head injury in the incident.

¶6In 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.

¶7Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant, all attending facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that allegations are serious in nature, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, in my view, it is not a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant. Prayer made in the application is refused.

¶8The application is rejected. Order Date :- 12.10.2023 safi High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad