Mainuddin v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1298 of 2023 Applicant :- Mainuddin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- J.B. Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anand Prakash Dubey Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant as well as the learned AGA and perused the entire record.

¶2Earlier by the order dated 22.03.2023 the accused applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by this Court. After investigation charge sheet has already been filed in the matter. The applicant has cooperated during that period and has not misused the said liberty. No custodial interrogation is required. Accused applicant has no criminal history to his credit. It also reveals from the perusal of the record that no specific role has been assigned to the present applicant in this case.

¶3In 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.

¶4Since no incriminating material has come against the applicant in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State, therefore, considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and also the nature of accusation made against the applicant, the anticipatory bail application is allowed and the order dated

22.03.2023 granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant is confirmed and made absolute till end of the trial, on the terms and conditions as mentioned in the said order dated 22.03.2023. Order Date :- 16.11.2023 Shivangi High Court of Judicature at Allahabad