Meraj v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11823 of 2023 Applicant :- Meraj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Pandey,Mohd. Kalim 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-Meraj in connection with Case Crime No. 190 of 2021, under sections 3/5/8 of U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, P.S. Mariyanhu, District Jaunpur.

¶3As per prosecution story, two accused persons, Bablu @ Kadir and Shadab have been arrested by the police on 07.08.2021 at about 08:20 AM along with one cow, which was alive. The applicant and other co-accused persons are stated to have run away from the scene of occurrence on 07.08.2021.

¶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 identically placed co-accused person, Mohd. Saif has already been granted anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial by the coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.11180 of 2023 vide order dated 18.10.2023, therefore, the accused applicant is also entitled for anticipatory bail as the case of the accused applicant is similar to that of co-accused person. It is next submitted that the applicant has been cooperative during the course of investigation of the case. It is also submitted that present applicant has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.7165 of 2021 vide order dated 31.08.2021 and the said liberty was never misused by him. It is next submitted that the criminal history of the accused applicant of solitary case has been explained. It is also submitted that after submission of the charge sheet, he is entitled for anticipatory bail. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall 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 matter, no specific role of assault has been assigned to the applicant in the alleged incident and except the finger fracture, all the injuries received by both injured persons are found simple in nature.

¶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 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, 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.

¶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 conclusion of 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 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 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.

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

(iii) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

(iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶11In 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 :- 30.10.2023 Shivangi High Court of Judicature at Allahabad