Amit Kumar @ Neta v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 71 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11509 of 2023 Applicant :- Amit Kumar @ Neta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Monika Pal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vishal Mishra Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶1Heard Ms Monika Pal, learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. Mr Vishal Mishra, learned counsel for the informant is also present.

¶2This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 182 of 2023, under section 306 IPC P.S. Achhalda, District Auraiya, during the pendency of application.

¶3As per contents of the FIR, sister of the first informant was enticed away by the nominated accused persons on 10.6.2023 at

5.1.5 a.m. and when the first informant and other family members were searching his sister, the GRP, who was posted there, told the first informant that one girl has died in train accident.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the incident took place on 10.6.2023 but the FIR has been lodged on 19.6.2023 without there being any plausible explanation. It is further submitted that there is no evidence of instigation against the applicant for committing the offence as such no offence is made out against the applicant under Section 306 IPC. It is further submitted that charge sheet has been submitted in the matter. The applicant is having definite apprehension that he may be arrested by the police any time. Applicant is a student and having no criminal antecedents. It is further submitted that the postmortem of deceased was conducted on 106.2023 and according to postmortem report the death is due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of antemortem injury.

¶5Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the said facts. It is further submitted that except the call details, there is no other evidence against the applicant.

¶6Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicant, he is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC

¶98The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶7In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant Amit Kumar @ Neta involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/-with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

(1) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation;

(2) 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; and

(3) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

(4) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.

(5) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant.

(6) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

(7) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against his in accordance with law.

¶8In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶9With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 30.10.2023 RavindraKSingh High Court of Judicature at Allahabad