Javed Aftab and Another v. State of U.P

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 716 of 2020 Applicant :- Javed Aftab And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vineet Vikram,Bhuvnesh Kumar Singh,Imran Ullah Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶2The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants - Javed Aftab and Parvez Aftab, with a prayer to release them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 1132 of 2019, under Sections-147, 148, 149, 188, 307, 323, 332, 336, 353, 427, 436, 120-B, 153-A, 295-A, 109 IPC, 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, 3 of Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, Police Station-Kotwali City, District-Bijnor.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that applicant no.1 is a Senior Advocate practicing in District Court, Bijnor, who is aged about 65 years and applicant no.2 is a teacher. They have been falsely implicated in this case, which relates to the protest against CAA and NRC. The applicants have definite apprehension that they may be arrested by the police any time. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. The investigation of the case was completed and charge-sheet was submitted into the matter. It is further submitted that the similarly placed co-accused Wajid Advocate @ Mohd. Wajid Khan Advocate has already been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 2.2.2021 passed in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. - 1728 of 2021. The case of the present applicants stands on identical footing, hence they are also entitled for anticipatory bail on the ground of parity.

¶4Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicants. He has submitted that in view of the seriousness of the allegations made against the applicants, they are not entitled to grant of anticipatory bail. The apprehension of the applicants is not founded on any material on record. Only on the basis of imaginary fear anticipatory bail cannot be granted.

¶5Although charge-sheet has been submitted in the present 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 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.

¶6Hence, 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, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicants till end of the trial in the matter.

¶7The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶8In the event of arrest of the applicants in the aforesaid case crime, they shall be released on anticipatory bail till end of the trial 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;

(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 officer;

(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.

¶9In case of default of any of the conditions, same may be a ground for cancellation of protection granted to the applicants. Order Date :- 7.11.2023 ss High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad