Nafees v. State of U.P

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10210 of 2023 Applicant :- Nafees Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Maohammd Nadeem Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

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

¶2Present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant -Nafees in Case Crime No.793 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 504, 506, 153A, 295A, 395, 307 IPC, Police Station - Kannauj, District - Kannauj.

¶3With an allegation of assault with the aid of kulhari, lathi, danda and desi pistol made by the named accused persons along with 6 to 7 unknown persons including the present applicant and for making some religious remarks, the F.I.R. was lodged on 26.10.2022 and investigation started, which is still going on against the present applicant.

¶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 only a general role of assault has been assigned to the applicant. It is further submitted that only simple injuries have been caused to both the injured persons of this case. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant is a student. It is next submitted that co-accused person, namely, Hasnain has already been granted anticipatory bail till filing of police report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C. by this Court vide order dated 25.08.2023 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 Cr.P.C. No.9699 of 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. He is cooperating with the investigation of the case so far. No custodial interrogation is required in the matter. In case the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶5Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶6In this matter, the criminal history of the accused applicant has been sufficiently explained and the applicant is said to be cooperating with the investigation.

¶7Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer.

¶8In 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, 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.

¶9In 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.

¶10Considering 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 filing of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. in the matter.

¶11The application is allowed.

¶12In the event of arrest of the applicant, 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 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.

¶13In case of default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of interim protection granted to the applicant. Order Date :- 31.10.2023 Shivangi High Court of Judicature at Allahabad