Rashid v. State of U.P

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11645 of 2023 Applicant :- Rashid Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

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

¶2Apprehending his arrest, the present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant - Rashid in Case No.2661 of 2022 (State Vs. Rashid) arising out of Case Crime No.0126 of 2021, under Sections 420, 406 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Aligarh, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶3It was alleged in the F.I.R. that on the false pretext of providing bank loan, some poor persons were befooled by the present applicant and by playing fraud with them, a huge amount of money was grabbed by the applicant. F.I.R. was lodged on

26.5.2021 and now charge-sheet has been submitted in this case.

¶4It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of his arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against her. He has been falsely implicated into this matter. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. The investigation of the case has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed. It is further submitted that the applicant never took any money from any person on the pretext of providing bank loan. The informant of the case borrowed Rs.2 lakh sometime before and when it was demanded back by the applicant, a false F.I.R. was lodged. It is further submitted that there is no aggrieved person in this matter at all and the whole prosecution story is concocted and fabricated. It is further submitted that there is no document on record as to when and how the money was taken by the applicant. It is also submitted that during course of investigation, notice under section 41-A Cr.P.C. was given to the applicant and said liberty was never misused by him. It is further submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history to his credit. During investigation, the applicant has been cooperative and now he is entitled for anticipatory bail till the end of trial.

¶5Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶6In the present case, the offences levelled against the applicant are punishable with imprisonment for a maximum period of seven years. Applicant has been cooperative during the course of investigation and after submission of charge-sheet, now no custodial interrogation is required in the matter.

¶7In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the controversy finally by holding the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial. It 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. It 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, 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.

¶8Hence, 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 end of the trial in the matter.

¶9The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶10In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till end of the trial on his 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 before the court concerned on the date fixed in the matter;

(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 him / her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(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 S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

¶11In case of default of any of the conditions, same may be a ground for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant. Order Date :- 26.10.2023 ss High Court of Judicature at Allahabad