Sanni @ Praveen Kumar @ Ravindra Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 19433 of 2021 Applicant :- Sanni @ Praveen Kumar @ Ravindra Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Shahnawaz Shah Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised. Rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri R.M. Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.

¶3The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 329 of 2021, under Sections 392 IPC, Police Station Nauchandi, District Meerut, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶4As per prosecution story, some unknown persons on bullet motorcycle, are stated to have snatched chain from the neck of the informant on 11.7.2021 at about 5.45 am.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive and has the apprehension of his arrest. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. Learned counsel has next stated that the FIR is delayed by about 21 days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. It is further stated that on the same day of lodging of the FIR, the co-accused person Aakash was arrested by the police and the name of the applicant has come up in his confession before them. The said statement of the co-accused person is not admissible in the Indian Evidence Act.

¶6Several 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. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, he will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.

¶7On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶8On due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties 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 law laid down by the Apex 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 judgement of the Apex Court.

¶9Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed.

¶10In the event of arrest of the applicant, Sanni @ Praveen Kumar @ Ravindra Kumar involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:- 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 previous permission of the court; iv. that 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;

¶11In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶12It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. (Justice Krishan Pahal) Order Date :- 16.12.2023 Shalini High Court of Judicature at Allahabad