Raju Kumar 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. - 12586 of 2023 Applicant :- Raju Kumar And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶1This application has been moved on behalf of the applicants - Raju Kumar, Praveen alias Pravindra, Raj Kumar and Omveer seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.314 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 504, 506, 308 IPC, Police Station Kairana, District Shamli.

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

¶3A total number of 13 named accused persons made an assault upon the informant side with the aid of lathi, danda and sharp edged weapons and several persons got injuries in the incident. F.I.R. was lodged and after investigation, now charge-sheet has been submitted into the matter.

¶4It has been argued 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. They have been falsely implicated in this matter. The investigation of the case has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed and cognizance has been taken by the Court concerned. It is further submitted that no specific role of assault has been assigned to any of the accused persons and deliberately a number of 13 persons have been falsely implicated in this matter. As a matter of fact, the informant side was itself aggressor and injuries have been caused to the persons of the accused side as well and F.I.R. in that matter as case crime no.315 of 2023 has already been lodged. It is also submitted that although fracture has been caused to one of the injured Babloo Kumar, but the injury is not serious and grievous. It is also submitted that during investigation, the applicants were cooperating and they had been granted anticipatory bail and the said liberty was not misused by them. It is further submitted that in case applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶5Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and it has been vehemently argued that several persons have got injuries in the incident and active role and participation of the applicants has been found during investigation in the commission of the crime. One of the injured has sustained fracture in the parietal bone and as such the applicants are not entitled for anticipatory bail.

¶6I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record carefully.

¶7In 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.

¶8Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of the applicants, number of injured persons and injuries and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, in my view, it is not a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicants. The prayer made in the application is refused.

¶9The anticipatory bail application is rejected.

¶10In the last, learned counsel for the applicants has urged that direction for expeditious disposal of the bail application of the applicants be given in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825.

¶11However, 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). It is further directed that the learned court concerned, while considering the bail application of the applicant in the light of Satender Kumar Antil case (supra), shall pass an order strictly in compliance of the directions given in the aforesaid judgment 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 :- 17.11.2023 ss High Court of Judicature at Allahabad