Rashid v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11544 of 2023 Applicant :- Rashid Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amar Jeet Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

1.Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶2Apprehending his arrest in Case Crime No. 194 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 224, 225, 332, 353, 336, 307, 393 I.P.C. and section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Jani, District Meerut, the applicant - Rashid has filed this anticipatory bail application seeking anticipatory bail in the aforesaid crime number.

¶3When the police went to the village of one Furkan alias Singhaniya, who was a wanted accused in some other case, then the named accused persons and some unknown persons caused hindrance in discharge of the official duty of the police and they also attacked upon them. Several police personnel got injuries in the incident. The first information report was lodged on 3.7.2023. The investigation started, which is still going on.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant submits that that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. He has been falsely implicated in this matter. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. Investigation is going on into the matter. It is further submitted that as per prosecution case a huge mob caused hindrance and attacked on the police party and it is quite improbable as to how the informant has identified the applicant in a huge mob of the village. He next submits that as per medical report the injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature. It is further submitted that some of the accused persons were granted protection by this Court, vide order dated 21.8.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 12168 of 2023 and some of the accused have been granted regular bail by the session court itself, vide order dated12.7.2023. It is further submitted that the applicant has been cooperative during the course of investigation. Applicant has no criminal history. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶5Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that in this case an attempt has been made by the mob, including present applicant to attack upon the police personnel with intention to kill them. However, he could not dispute the factual aspect that the injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature.

¶6From the perusal of the record it appears that the name of the present applicant came into light on the basis of statement of the co-accused. Applicant is cooperating with the investigation.

¶7In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held 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.

¶8In Siddharth Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, (2022) 1 Supreme Court Cases 676, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that personal liberty is an important aspect of our constitutional mandate. The occasion to arrest an accused during investigation arises when custodial investigation becomes necessary or it is a heinous crime or where there is a possibility of influencing the witnesses or accused may abscond. Merely because an arrest can be made because it is lawful does not mandate that arrest must be made. A distinction must be made between the existence of the power to arrest and the justification for exercise of it. If arrest is made routine, it can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self-esteem of a person. If the Investigating Officer has no reason to believe that the accused will abscond or disobey summons and has, in fact, throughout cooperated with the investigation, then there is no compulsion on the officer to arrest the accused.

¶9Considering 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 the filing of police report under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court.

¶10The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶11In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till the filing of police report under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/-with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

(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 office.

(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.

¶12In case of default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant. Order Date :- 30.10.2023 Faridul High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad