Allahabad High Court
Amit Kumar vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. ... on 31 August, 2024
Author: Karunesh Singh Pawar
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:59763 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 313 of 2024 Applicant :- Amit Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Mansoor,Syed Ali Rehan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Azizullah Khan,Mohammad Alishah Faruqi Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime/FIR No. 1185/2019, under Sections 406/471/468/467/420 and 419 IPC, Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. None appears on behalf of the complainant.
The coordinate Bench of this Court while granting interim protection to the applicant vide order dated 20.02.2024 has passed the following order:-
"1. Heard Mr. Mohd. Mansoor, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Sayed Ali Rehan, learned counsel for the informant-Bank, as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the informant-Bank prays for sometime for the purpose of filing counter affidavit/objection.
2. This application has been moved by the applicant- Amit Kumar for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No.01185 of 2019, under Sections 406, 471, 468, 467, 420 and 419 IPC lodged at Police Station Gomtinagar, District Lucknow.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is a case of false implication. The allegations levelled in the FIR are to the tune that the applicant has taken a loan from the informant and later on it is allegedly discovered that the security which was placed for the purpose of mortgage had earlier been hypotheticated to some other bank and, in this regard, it was apprehended by the informant-bank that the recovery of the loan amount may not be possible and, therefore, the FIR has been lodged.
4. It is vehemently submitted that on the apprehension of the informant-bank, the applicant has placed another property for hypothication and with regard to that property also, same apprehension is shown by the informant-bank, however, the dispute is purely of civil nature.
5. It is further submitted that the applicant, after lodging of the FIR, had approached this court by filing writ petition Misc. Bench No.34764 of 2019 and vide order dated 13.12.2019 protection from arrest till submission of police report under section 173(2) CrPC was granted to him. He has thoroughly cooperated in the investigation and charge-sheet has now been submitted. It is vehemently submitted that since the applicant has not been arrested during the course of investigation and he has cooperated throughout the investigation, confining him in prison only for the purpose of disposal of his regular bail application will not only curtail his personal liberty but also give a bad-name to him and tarnish his reputation in the society.
6. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant-bank opposes the prayer of the applicant for grant of anticipatory bail and requested for grant of sometime for the purpose of filing counter affidavit/objections.
7. Let the matter be listed on 13.03.2024 by which date the State as well as learned counsel for the informant-bank may file counter affidavit/objection.
8. Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the applicant-Amit Kumar, involved in the above noted case, under any process of the trial Court or on his/her appearance/surrender before the trial Court within 15 days from today i.e. till 05.03.2024, whichever is earlier, he/she shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail on his/her furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, subject to the following conditions:-
(i). The applicant, if not arrested earlier, shall appear before the trial court within 20 days from today i.e. till 05.03.2024 and cooperate in the trial and shall not seek any adjournment when the prosecution witness would be in attendance.
(ii). In case of further investigation or re-investigation the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and make himself/herself available as and when required by the Investigating officer of the case, even for the recovery of any fact.
(iii). The applicant shall not make any attempt to influence the prosecution witnesses and will also not commit any crime during his/her release on anticipatory bail.
(iv). The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he/she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and specially when the prosecution witnesses are present in court.
(v). The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
9. If in the opinion of the trial court default of any of the condition placed above is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and shall proceed against him/her in accordance with law."
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that charge sheet in the matter has been filed. The applicant has cooperated in the investigation and further undertakes to cooperate in the trial. He further submits that pursuant to the order dated 20.02.2024 whereby interim protection was granted by the applicant, the applicant has filed the bonds.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application, however, could not dispute the fact that the applicant has cooperated in the investigation.
On due consideration to the fact that the offences are triable by magistrate; charge sheet has been filed; the applicant has no criminal antecedent, he has cooperated in the investigation and further undertakes to cooperate in the trial, the interim protection granted by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.02.2024 is made absolute in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.
In view of the above, since, charge-sheet in the matter has been filed, if the applicant is summoned to face trial for offence in question, he shall be released on bail by the trial court on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial 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 tamper with the evidence;
(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;
Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed.
It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed.
Perusal of the record shows that the victim on the date of incident was 14 years old; she has supported the prosecution case in her statement under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.; complicity of the applicant is evident, hence, no case for anticipatory bail is made out.
Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is dismissed.
Order Date :- 31.8.2024/R.C.