Allahabad High Court
Sundarlal vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 15 December, 2023
Author: Raj Beer Singh
Bench: Raj Beer Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:238976 Court No. - 78 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10571 of 2023 Applicant :- Sundarlal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shams Uz Zaman Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.750 of 2020, under Sections 7/13 Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Deoband, District Saharanpur with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.
3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas, there is no credible evidence against him. The first information report was lodged by the informant alleging that one Dileep Jaiswal has made a complaint to the Commissioner, Saharanpur that applicant-accused has demanded an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- for verification of electricity bills and accordingly, the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- was deposited in the account of son of applicant-accused. Learned counsel submitted that in departmental enquiry, no role of applicant was found and he was exonerated and it was also observed in the enquiry that someone is sending complaints against applicant by the name of Sandeep to harass the applicant. The suspension of applicant was also revoked. Learned counsel has referred the report of Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Deoband, which has been annexed as Annexure-3 to this bail application. There is no evidence that amount shown in the account of son of applicant was collected on behalf of applicant. There is no evidence that applicant has demanded any amount from any consumer. No incriminating article has been recovered from applicant. It is further submitted that during investigation the applicant was granted anticipatory bail by this Court, vide order dated 06.02.2023, passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.8546 of 2020 for the period till submission of charge-sheet and now the investigation is complete and the charge-sheet has already been submitted. It was submitted that the applicant has remained on anticipatory bail during investigation, thus no purpose would be served by sending the applicant to jail after submission of charge-sheet. The applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.
4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that alleged amount of Rs.1,00,000/- was collected in the account of son of applicant-accused and it was a kickback amount. However, it could not be disputed that in departmental enquiry applicant-accused has been exonerated and during investigation, he was granted anticipatory bail.
5. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.
6. In the instant case, 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 on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.
7. The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
8. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Sundarlal 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 below concerned with the following conditions :-
(i). The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii). The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii). The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
(iv). 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.
(v). 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
9. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the Court below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of applicant in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 15.12.2023 Neeraj