Saurabh v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11783 of 2023 Applicant :- Saurabh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Rana Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶1This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant Saurabh seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.136 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 308, 325, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Medical College, District Meerut.

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

¶3It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of his arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. It is further submitted that only a general role of assault has been assigned to the present applicant in the alleged incident. The injured himself has not assigned any specific role to the present applicant in his statement given to the I.O. under Section 161 CrPC. It is further submitted that except one fracture in the ribs, no other serious or grievous injury has been sustained by the injured and all the injuries are simple in nature. During investigation, notice under Section 41-A CrPC was given to the present applicant and the said liberty has not been misused by him. The investigation of the case has been completed and charge sheet has been filed. The applicant has been cooperative throughout the investigation. Applicant has no criminal history to his credit. No process under Sections 82 and 83 CrPC has been issued against the applicant and the applicant has not been declared absconder. It has been submitted that in case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶4Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that fracture in the ribs of the injured has been found in the supplementary medical report. It is also submitted that the doctor in his statement given to the I.O. has opined that the injury no.2 which denotes fracture in the chest ribs is grievous in nature. Injuries are on the different parts of the body. Ample and sufficient evidence has been collected against the applicant during investigation.

¶5In this matter, from the perusal of the record it appears that the injured Sanjay was bitterly assaulted by the 8 named and 3-4 unknown accused persons with the aid of lathi, danda, hockey, sariya, deshi pistol etc. and he sustained grievous injuries. F.I.R. was lodged on 5.3.2018 and investigation started which culminated into charge sheet. It also reveals from the perusal of the record that injuries sustained by the injured are grievous. There is fracture in two ribs of the injured. Sufficient evidence has been collected against the applicant during investigation.

¶6In 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.

¶7Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant, 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 applicant. Prayer made in the application is refused.

¶8The application is rejected.

¶9In the last, learned counsel has urged that direction for expeditious disposal of bail application of the applicant be given.

¶10Hence, it is observed that in case applicant surrenders before the court below and applies for bail, the same 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 vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825 . Order Date :- 20.11.2023 safi High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad