Allahabad High Court
Meenakshi Kumar vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 18 July, 2022
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 16 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1140 of 2022 Applicant :- Meenakshi Kumar Opposite Party :- Central Bureau Of Investigation Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Mishra,Lalit Kishore Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anurag Kumar Singh Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pushpendra Kumar Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the C.B.I. as well as perused the record.
The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Crime No. RC-0532021S0002 of 2021, registered under Sections 120-B, 201, 409, 418, 420, 421, 463, 471, 477 IPC & Sections 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 at Police Station- CBI/SCB/Lucknow, District Lucknow with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that co-accused person, Sandeep Kumar Singh, has already been granted anticipatory bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 31.05.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.839 of 2022. Therefore, the present applicant is also entitled for anticipatory bail on the ground of parity. The charge-sheet has already been filed against the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he will cooperate in the trial failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.
The prayer for anticipatory bail has been vehemently opposed by learned counsel for the CBI. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by him.
On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned counsel for the CBI 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 judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and Others vs. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 656". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Meenakshi Kumar be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
2. 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;
3. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
4. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
5. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
6. that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial or deciding the regular bail application.
Order Date :- 18.7.2022 Ravi Kant