Vishun Lal v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12661 of 2023 Applicant :- Vishun Lal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Sharma,Kapil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Araf Khan,Sonakshi Arora Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶3Heard Sri Anil Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Sonakshi Arora, learned counsel for the informant and Sri S.P. Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶4The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.126 of 2023 registered under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506 and 307 IPC at Police Station-Chaubia, District Etawah with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶5As per prosecution story, the applicant and other family members are stated to have assaulted the son and grand-son of the informant, whereby the applicant is stated to have fired at them. The son of the informant Yashwant Dubey is stated to have sustained head injuries.

¶6Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case owing to a land dispute. The injury report of Yashwant Dubey indicates an injury i.e. contusion 1 x .5 c.m. over mid of forehead region between eye-brows and 1.5 c.m. above from right eye-brow, there is traumatic swelling. Learned counsel has further stated that in the opinion of the treating doctor, the said injuries were caused by hard and blunt object. The applicant has been assigned the role of firing from a CMP. There is no firearm injury sustained by the injured person.

¶7Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that earlier, two cases were instituted against the applicant and in both the cases, the compromise has been entered between the parties. The said documents have been filed with the supplementary affidavit filed today. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.

¶8Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶10In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant-Vishun Lal be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

(i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii). that 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

(vi). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶11It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial. Order Date :- 28.11.2023 Ravi Kant (Krishan Pahal, J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad