Raees Ahmad v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2320 of 2023 Applicant :- Raees Ahmad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Singh,Rajendra Prasad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

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

¶2This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by applicant-Raees Ahmad in connection with Case Crime No.55 of 2020 under section 379 IPC and Section 3/4 Damage to Public Property Act, P.W. Swar, District Rampur.

¶3An FIR was lodged against the present applicant alleging therein the office of illegal mining and transportation by the present applicant on 24.01.2020. Now, charge-sheet has been submitted in this matter.

¶4It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. Charge sheet in the matter has been submitted. It is further submitted that during investigation, notice under Section 41a Cr.P.C. was given to the applicant and he has been cooperative during the entire investigation. It is further submitted that the applicant has explained the criminal history by way of a supplementary affidavit. It is next contended that after submission of charge-sheet, the applicant has not been declared a proclaimed offender. It is also submitted that the offence alleged against the applicant is punishable with the maximum period of seven years. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶5Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail to the applicant.

¶6In this matter, after submission of charge-sheet now no custodial interrogation is required from the present applicant. It also appears from the perusal of record that the charge-sheet was challenged by way of application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 23540 of 2021, which was disposed of with the observation that the cognizance order under Section 4/21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act was quashed.

¶7Although 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.

¶8Hence, 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 conclusion of trial in the matter.

¶9The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶10In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail 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 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 applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

(iii) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

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

¶11In 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 applicant in accordance with law. Order Date :- 30.11.2023 Vijay High Court of Judicature at Allahabad