Neeraj Chauhan v. State of U.P

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11650 of 2023 Applicant :- Smt. Neeraj Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mrityunjay Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the material available on record.

¶2This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by applicant-Smt. Neeraj Chauhan in connection with Case Crime No. 0114 of 2022 under sections 323, 324, 308, 504, 506, 120B IPC, P.S. Jawan, District-Aligarh.

¶3Co-accused Vijay Kumar Chauhan, Madresh Kumar Chauhan, Niraj along with one unknown person bitterly assaulted the lady informant on road and the name of the present applicant was implicated on the ground that she was the master mind behind the whole crime. The informant has received serious injuries. FIR was lodged on 2.5.2022 and now the charge sheet has been submitted.

¶4It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. Charge sheet in the matter has been submitted. It is further submitted that no where it is mentioned that in the FIR the present applicant was present on the place of occurrence in any way. It is further submitted that the name of the applicant was implicated in this matter only on the basis of the suspicion and also due to the animosity of family dispute. It is further submitted that the injured in her statement given to the I.O. of the case has also not named the present applicant as present on the place of occurrence and as such no assault was made by the present applicant. It is further submitted that during course of investigation although the anticipatory bail application no. 8068 of 2022 moved by the present applicant along with the other co-accused Vijay Kumar Chauhan, which was rejected by this Court vide order dated

6.9.2022 but as a matter of fact a notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. was given by the I.O. It is further submitted that after submission of the charge sheet now no custodial interrogation is required and the liberty granted during course of investigation was never misused by the present applicant, who is the lady. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶5Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶6In the present case the applicant was not present on the place of occurrence and no injury has been inflicted to the injured by the present applicant herself. Charge sheet has been submitted and no custodial interrogation is required.

¶7Although the charge sheet has been submitted in this matter but in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the law on the subject finally by holding that the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.

¶8It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial.

¶9It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court 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, llikelihood 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.

¶10Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till conclusion of trial in the matter.

¶11The anticipatory bail application is allowed accordingly.

¶12In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, she shall be released on anticipatory bail on her 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 not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. ii. The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. iii.The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which she is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which she is suspected. iv.The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court and if she has passport, the same shall be deposited by her before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶13In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail of the applicant in accordance with law. Order Date :- 26.10.2023 Fhd High Court of Judicature at Allahabad