Raj Kumari and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11122 of 2023 Applicant :- Raj Kumari And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amar Nath Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶1Heard Shri Amar Nath Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶2The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants, namely, Raj Kumari and Jay Prakash Gupta, in Case Crime No.- 147/2022, under Sections-419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station-Shahganj , District-Jaunpur.

¶3The applicants has only been implicated on the ground that their names have been found in khatauni of one Chanara Devi as her successors, when she was alive.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the lekhpal has made entry of name of the applicants and also other co-accused. It is case of false implication. Applicants have no criminal history to their credit. The applicants have definite apprehension that they may be arrested by the police any time. It is further submitted that similarly placed co-accused Om Prakash has been granted anticipatory bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.4.2023 passed in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. - 3716 of 2023.

¶5Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicants. He has submitted that in view of the seriousness of the allegations made against the applicants, they are not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. The apprehension of the applicants is not founded on any material on record. Only on the basis of imaginary fear anticipatory bail cannot be granted.

¶6After considering the rival submissions this court finds that there is a case registered/about to be registered against the applicants. It cannot be definitely said when the police may apprehend them. After the lodging of FIR 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 FIR 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 rights and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative. According to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the peculiar case the arrest of an accused should be made.

¶7Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and his antecedents, the applicants are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail for limited period in this case considering the exceptions considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

¶8In the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/-with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned Court with the following conditions:-

(i) The applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by the 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) 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.

¶9In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/Govt. Advocate/concerned court is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.

¶10The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation, if pending, of the present case in accordance with law, expeditiously, independently without being prejudiced by any observations made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicants.

¶11The applicants are directed to produce a certified copy of this order of this Court before the S.S.P./S.P./C.P./A.C.P. concerned within ten days from today, if investigation is in progress who shall ensure the compliance of present order. Order Date :- 17.10.2023 ss High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad