Mahaveer and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12205 of 2023 Applicant :- Mahaveer And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Rajiv Sisodia, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶2This application has been moved on behalf of the applicants 1. Mahaveer, 2. Madan, 3. Pappu 4. Vishal seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 75 of 2023, under Sections 308, 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station - Syohara, District-Bijnor.

¶3All the named accused persons made an assault upon Hasharat, uncle of the informant, who sustained grevious injuries. FIR was lodged on 11.02.2023 and investigation started. Now the charge sheet has been submitted.

¶4It has been 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. The investigation of the case has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed. It is further submitted that general role has been assigned to all the accused persons and no specific role has been assigned the the present applicants. The injured has sustained only simple injuries. There is a cross case in the matter as case crime no. 068 of 2023 under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 3

(1)(Da), 3 (1)(Gha) of SC/ST Act. It is further submitted that applicants have been cooperative during course of investigation. The applicants have no criminal history to their credit. It has been submitted that 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. It is vehemently submitted that the injured has sustained grevious and serious injuries upon his body, six ribs of the chest have been found broken in the x-ray report. It is further submitted that in the x-ray report of the injured, 5 injuries have been sustained by the injured in which injury no.4 has been found grevious in nature by the doctor. It is further submitted that at this stage no benefit can be given in the cross case.

¶6Although the charge sheet has been submitted in this matter but 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.

¶7It 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.

¶8It 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, 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.

¶9Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, I deem it not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicants. Prayer made in the application is refused.

¶10The anticipatory bail application is rejected.

¶11In the last, learned counsel for the applicants has urged that direction be given to the learned Court concerned to consider and decide the bail application of the applicants in terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825.

¶12Hence, it is observed that the bail application of the applicants, if moved, shall be considered and decided by the Court concerned in terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil case (supra).

¶13It is further directed that the Court concerned while considering the bail application of the applicants in the light of Satender Kumar Antil case (supra), shall pass an order strictly in compliance of the directions given in the aforesaid judgement by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in letter and spirit, particularly complying with the order dated 21.3.2023 of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid matter. Order Date :- 6.11.2023 Fhd High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad