Faizan v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12710 of 2023 Applicant :- Faizan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vidya Dhar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶2Apprehending his arrest, the present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant - Faizan in Case Crime No.173 of 2023, under Sections 354, 294, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Hazrat Nagar Garhi, District Sambhal, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶3An allegation of eve-teasing was made against the present applicant and F.I.R. was lodged against him. Now charge-sheet has been submitted in the matter.

¶4It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of his arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against her. He has been falsely implicated into this matter. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. The investigation of the case has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed. It is further submitted that there is no injury report of the victim on record. It is further submitted that in the F.I.R. itself there is no mention of any eyewitness of the alleged incident. It is also submitted that due to some family dispute, F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicant falsely implicating him on the basis of false and fabricated facts. It is also submitted that during the course of investigation, the applicant has been cooperative. He is having no criminal antecedents to his credit. It is further submitted that no custodial interrogation is required in this matter from the applicant. After submission of charge-sheet, he is entitled for anticipatory bail.

¶5Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the anticipatory bail and it has been vehemently argued that ample and sufficient evidence has been collected against the applicant during investigation and on the basis of that, charge-sheet has been submitted into the matter. Offence is of serious nature and the applicant is not entitled for anticipatory bail.

¶6In the present matter, offences levelled against the applicant are punishable with an imprisonment for a maximum period of seven years. The applicant has been cooperative throughout the investigation. He is having no criminal antecedents to his credit. After submission of charge-sheet, no custodial interrogation is required in this matter.

¶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.

¶8In Aman Preet Singh vs. C.B.I. through Director, AIR 2021 Supreme Court 4154, the Hon'ble Apex Court has clearly held that if a person, who is an accused in a non-bailable/cognizable offence, was not taken into custody during the period of investigation, in such a case, it is appropriate that he may be released on bail as the circumstances of his having not been arrested during investigation or not being produced in custody is itself sufficient to entitle him/her to be released on bail.

¶9Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant 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 applicant till end of the trial in the matter.

¶10The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶11In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till end of the trial on his 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 applicant shall make himself available before the court concerned on the date fixed in the matter;

(ii) 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 / her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

¶12In case of default of any of the conditions, same may be a ground for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant. Order Date :- 21.11.2023 ss High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad