Jai Govind Singh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12176 of 2023 Applicant :- Jai Govind Singh And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Neeraj Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶1This application has been moved on behalf of the applicants Jai Govind Singh, Surjeet Kumar Singh and Subhanjay Singh seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 79 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308, 325 IPC, Police Station Bhatpar Rani, District Deoria.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶3It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have apprehension of their 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 F.I.R. in this case has been lodged belatedly without any plausible explanation regarding delay. There is no independent witness of the alleged incident. Criminal history of the applicants has been sufficiently explained. The investigation of the case has been completed and charge sheet has been filed. It is also submitted that the dispute is purely of civil nature. Offence under Section 308 IPC is not made against he applicants. Injuries received to the injured are simple in nature. It has been submitted that in case applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶4Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that the injured has received serious and grievous injuries in the alleged incident. There is fracture in his three ribs. In the F.I.R. as well as in the statement of the injured given to the I.O. specific role of assault has been assigned to the present applicants. They have participated in commission of the crime actively. The applicants are named in the F.I.R.

¶5I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

¶6From the perusal of the record, it reveals that on 23.5.2021 when the accused persons were taking forceful possession over the land of the informant, he resisted and thereafter they made assault upon him with the aid of iron road, hockey and lathi and he sustained grievous injuries. F.I.R. was lodged on 12.6.2021 and investigation started, which culminated into charge sheet. It also reveals from the perusal of the record that there is fracture in three ribs of the informant. The injured has assigned specific role of assault to the present applicants in his statement given to the I.O.. Serious and grievous injuries have been received by the injured in the occurrence. They have actively participated in commission of the crime.

¶7Though charge sheet has been submitted in the matter, yet 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, 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.

¶8Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicants, all attending facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that allegations are serious in nature, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, in my view, it is not a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicants. Prayer made in the application is refused.

¶9The application is rejected.

¶10In the last, learned counsel has urged that direction for expeditious disposal of bail application of the applicants be given.

¶11Hence, it is observed that in case applicants surrender before the court below and apply for bail, the same shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law. Order Date :- 6.11.2023 safi High Court of Judicature at Allahabad