Rajpal v. State of U.P

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11789 of 2023 Applicant :- Rajpal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Virendra Singh,Abhai Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2This is the second anticipatory bail application. The first Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. 6796 of 2023 was dismissed by this Court as having been rendered infructuous due to want of prosecution, as the counsel for the applicant could not appear in Court on 26.9.2023.

¶3Heard Sri Virendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Suneel Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶4The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 89 of 2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Chhatari, District Buland Sahar, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that earlier on, the applicant was granted interim protection vide order dated

13.6.2023 in the very same anticipatory bail application. It is further stated that the applicant has the apprehension of his arrest and has claimed parity with the co-accused persons Kuldeep Sharma and Smt. Sudha Sharma, who have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. Nos. 2375 of 2023 and 2376 of 2023 vide order dated 4.8.2023 and 25.8.2023 respectively. The applicant has no criminal history. Since the case of the applicant is at par with the co-accused who have already been granted anticipatory bail, the applicant is also entitled for the same on the ground of parity.

¶6The prayer for anticipatory bail has have been vehemently opposed by learned AGA. and learned counsel for the informant. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by him.

¶7Considering the fact that the earlier order was not passed on merits, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and in light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgement passed by the Apex Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶8In the event of arrest of the applicant, Rajpal involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:- i. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; ii. that 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; iv. that in case, the charge-sheet is submitted, the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; v. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; vi. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶9In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the anticipatory bail of the applicant.

¶10It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. (Justice Krishan Pahal) Order Date :- 16.11.2023\Shalini High Court of Judicature at Allahabad