Virendra and Another v. State of U.P

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12782 of 2023 Applicant :- Virendra And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldip Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA and perused the material available on record.

¶2This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by applicants-Virendra & Vivek in connection with Case Crime No. 317 of 2022, under sections 323, 325, 452, 504 IPC, Police Station Phaphund, District Auraiya.

¶3It is alleged in the F.I.R. that with the allegation of assault after entering into the house of the informant in drunken conditions, an F.I.R. was lodged against both the named accused persons, who are present applicants on 11.11.2022 and after investigation, now charge sheet has been submitted in this matter.

¶4It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against them. Allegations levelled against the applicants are false. After investigation charge sheet has been submitted in the matter. In case applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶5It is further submitted that only simple injuries has been caused to the injured persons of this case. It is next submitted that no specific role of assault has been assigned to any of the accused persons. It is further submitted that during investigation, the applicants have been cooperative and they have no criminal history to their credit. It is next submitted that the charge sheet has been submitted in this matter and the offence levelled against the present applicants is punishable with the imprisonment for a maximum period of seven years. It is next submitted that no custodial interrogation is required from the present applicants and as such, they are entitled for anticipatory bail.

¶6Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. However, he could not dispute the factual aspect of the matter that the offence levelled against the present applicants is punishable with the imprisonment for a maximum period of seven years.

¶7In this present case, after submission of charge sheet, now no custodial interrogation is required from the present applicant. The I.O. of the case did not require the arrest of the accused persons during investigation.

¶8Although the charge sheet has been submitted in this 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 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, llikelihood 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.

¶9Hence, 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 conclusion of trial in the matter.

¶10The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶11In the event of arrest of the applicants in the aforesaid case crime, they shall be released on anticipatory bail 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 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.

(ii) The applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

(iii) The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.

(iv) The applicants shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶12In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail of the applicants in accordance with law. Order Date :- 22.11.2023 Shivangi High Court of Judicature at Allahabad