Allahabad High Court
Dr. Ashish Mittal vs State Of U.P. And Another on 3 October, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:189458 Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6406 of 2022 Applicant :- Dr. Ashish Mittal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sameer Shanker,Anjali Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.
1. Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the material available on record.
3. This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by applicant-Dr. Ashish Mittal in connection with Case Crime No. 0118 of 2022, under sections 143, 144, 145, 147, 148, 149, 153-A, 153-B, 295-A, 201, 511, 307, 332, 333, 353, 395, 435, 436, 427, 504, 505(2), 506, 120-B I.P.C. 1860, Section 4, 5 of the Explosive Substance Act, 1908, Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1932, Section 83 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and Section 3/4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, P.S. Khuldabad, District Prayagraj.
4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. Charge sheet in the matter has been submitted. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.
5. It is further submitted that 70 people were named in the FIR on the allegations of attacking the police party when the applicants as part of crowd were protesting on some issue; it is stated that some of the named persons i.e., Shah Alam and Mohd. Zeeshan Rahmani, having absolutely identical case, have been granted bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 6486 of 2022 and 7421 of 2022 respectively vide order dated 28.11.2022; he has been named on the basis of suspicion only and that there was no evidence against him to connect him with the crime or to show that he actually participated in the protest. It is further submitted that no specific role has been assigned to the present applicant in the alleged commission of crime. It is next submitted that the criminal history of the present applicant has been explained in the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail application. It is also submitted that an Application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 18987 of 2022 was earlier filed by the applicant only to protest non bailable warrant issued against him and an interim protection was granted to the applicant but it lost its effect on filing of the charge sheet before the court. It is also submitted that he has been cooperative during the course of investigation and as such, he is entitled for anticipatory bail.
6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
7. Although the charge sheet has been submitted in this matter, but in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the controversy finally by holding the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.
It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial.
It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, llikelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.
8. Hence, 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 of the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till conclusion of trial in the matter.
9. The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
10. In the event of arrest of the applicant 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 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) 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.
(iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.
11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail of the applicant in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 3.10.2023 Shivangi