Allahabad High Court
Arun Yadav And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. on 6 May, 2022
Author: Ali Zamin
Bench: Ali Zamin
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 76 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 18735 of 2021 Applicant :- Arun Yadav And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Kumar Yadav,Shashi Kant Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.
Heard over anticipatory bail application, under Section 438 Cr.P.C., moved by the applicants- Arun Yadav, Brijesh and Yogesh in Case Crime No. 477 of 2021, under Sections 147, 427, 436 I.P.C., P.S. Ghosi, District Mau.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per FIR version applicant has kept a gumti at Baruha Chatti of betal, grocery, oil, shop etc. Two days before two groups had committed maar peet, stone pelting near the gumti aforesaid persons and Yogesh. At about 1.30 hour on 8th July, 2021 Upendra, Vishal, Arun, Brijesh were coming from two hundred meter distance away from the gumti Yogesh set on fires the gumti of the informant on account of which 40-45 thousands goods and cash of Rs.4,000/- were burnt. He submits that incident occurred on 8th July, 2021 and FIR has been lodged on 19th July, 2021 by delay of 9 days. He further submits that FIR version is manufactured one. At the time of incident lockdown was imposed near about all over the country hence no show programme was possible. He submits that father of accused Vishal lodged an FIR Case Crime No. 426 of 2021, under Sections 427, 436, 506 I.P.C. on 27th June, 2021 and in counterblast of the aforesaid FIR this FIR has been lodged against Buchiya @ Buchchi, husband of the informant Manoj Yadav and Sanjay in that case Buchiya @ Buchchi has been granted anticipatory bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.12.2021 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.18813 of 2021 and case of the applicant is identical to co-accused enlarged on bail, therefore, the the applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail. He submits that applicant no. 1 Arun Yadav has two criminal history, Case Crime No. 374 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C. and Case Crime No. 446 of 2021, under Sections 279, 427, 436 I.P.C. both cases are pending against him which has been explained in Para- 3 of the second supplementary affidavit. He further submits that applicant no. 2 has more criminal history which has wrongly been mentioned and applicant no. 3 has no criminal history as stated in Para- 5 of the second supplementary affidavit. Application for anticipatory bail was moved before court of session where it was rejected summarily and there is every likelihood of arrest of applicant by the police; it is a false implication owing to business rivalry; hence this anticipatory bail application with above prayer.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed, by submitting that applicant Yogesh has no criminal history and Arun has a criminal history of two cases and applicant no. 2 Brijesh has a criminal history of 7 cases, therefore, they are not entitled for anticipatory bail.
Having heard and gone through material placed on record and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering applicant Yogesh has no criminal history and before lodging the present FIR lodged by father of accused Vishal against informant's wife and other on 27th June, 2021 and law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the Case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC Online SC 98, ground for grant of anticipatory bail is made out for applicants Arun Yadav and Yogesh.
In case of arrest, the applicant, Arun Yadav and Yogesh is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in above case crime number, till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. before the competent court on their furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties each of like amount to the satisfaction of Station House Officer of police station/ court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required, if investigation is in progress;
(ii) 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 such person from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned/Court concerned;
In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/Government Advocate is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
The Investigating Officer will continue with the investigation, if it is in progress and will not be affected by this order.
A copy of this order shall also be produced before the S.P/S.S.P concerned by the applicant, within a week, if the investigation is still in progress, who shall ensure compliance of this order.
This anticipatory bail application is allowed.
AND Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 18735 of 2021 Applicant :- Brijesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Kumar Yadav,Shashi Kant Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.
On the request of learned counsel for the applicant to enable him to file better applications, put up on 24th May, 2022 as fresh.
Order Date :- 6.5.2022 Israr