Prithviraj and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12797 of 2023 Applicant :- Prithviraj And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Narayan Singh(Kushwaha) Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶3Heard Sri Narayan Singh (Kushwaha), learned counsel for the applicants 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 applicants in Case Crime No. 401 of 2014, registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 307, 506 I.P.C. at Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District Etah with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that co-accused persons, Manoj Kumar and Atul Kumar, have already been granted anticipatory bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 6.4.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.1208 of 2023. The criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant no.2 stands explained vide supplementary affidavit filed today. The applicant no.1 has no criminal antecedent to his credit. Therefore, the present applicants are also entitled for anticipatory bail on the ground of parity. Learned counsel for the applicants undertake that they will cooperate in the trial failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.

¶6The prayer for anticipatory bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by him.

¶7Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and in light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgement passed by the Apex Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶8In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the accused-applicants-Prithviraj and Brajesh @ Bhoore 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 applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

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

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

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

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

(vi). that the applicants 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 below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶9It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial. Order Date :- 14.12.2023 Vikas [Krishan Pahal, J.] High Court of Judicature at Allahabad