Vikrant and 2 Others v. State of U.P

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11568 of 2023 Applicant :- Vikrant And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Deepak Kumar Pal Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶1Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶2This application has been moved on behalf of the applicants - Vikrant, Chandrabhan and Nipendra @ Neetu seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.126 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 308, 452, 506, 34 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Bijnor.

¶3Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the informant as well as the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶4It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against them. Allegations levelled against the applicants are false. It is further submitted that the whole prosecution story is false and fabricated. The injured persons have sustained only simple injuries. Injured Babita has sustained one serious head injury but in her statement recorded under Section 161 CrPC she has assigned specific role for causing the said injury to the co-accused Risabh and the present applicant has been assigned only general role of assault. Though applicant nos.1 and 3 have no criminal history to their credit yet the criminal history of applicant no. 2 has been explained sufficiently. After completion of investigation, charge sheet has been submitted in the matter. No process under Sections 82 and 83 CrPC has been issued against the applicants and the applicants have not been declared absconder. In case applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶5Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and it has been submitted that three persons have sustained injuries in this matter and it was an intentional assault on the part of the applicants. Injured Babita has sustained serious and grievous head injury and the doctor has also opined that the said injury was very dangerous.

¶6I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

¶7In this matter from the perusal of the record it reveals that in a worship proceeding in the village, an altercation took place between both the parties and the accused persons five in number including the present applicants made an assault upon the informant side and three persons sustained serious injuries. F.I.R. was lodged and after investigation charge sheet has been submitted. It also reveals that after submission of charge sheet no custodial interrogation is required. It also reveals from the perusal of the record that specific role of causing grievous injury to the injured Babita has been assigned to co-accused Risabh. Applicants had been cooperative during investigation.

¶8In 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. 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.

¶9Considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, nature of accusation, role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicants till the end of trial.

¶10The application is allowed accordingly.

¶11In the event of arrest of the applicants, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their 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 applicants shall make themselves available before the Court concerned on the date fixed in the matter and will cooperate in the trial.

(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 him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office.

(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.

¶12In case of default of any of the conditions, the same may be a ground for cancellation of protection granted to the applicants. Order Date :- 30.10.2023 safi High Court of Judicature at Allahabad