Allahabad High Court
Julfkar @ Bhaiya & Another vs State Of U.P. & Another on 3 August, 2021
Author: Chandra Dhari Singh
Bench: Chandra Dhari Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 217 of 2021 Applicant :- Julfkar @ Bhaiya & Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akashdeep Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.
Heard learned Counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A.
The present application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in FIR/ Case Crime No.03 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Palia, District Lakhimpur Kheri.
Learned Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is a case where both sides have lodged FIR. As per the injury report, injured Sangam Gupta have received two gunshot injury. The complainant levelled general allegations against all the accused persons. The co-accused Junaid, Amir Khan and Sanju Khan have already been enlarged on bail by the court below. The applicants will not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case. The application will co-operate with the investigating agency and will not tamper with the evidence. The applicant has no criminal history.
Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State has submitted that the applicants are absconding. Vide order dated 28.02.2020, non-bailable warrants were issued against them. Learned A.G.A. has further submitted that now the proceedings under Section 82 have also been initiated against them. In these circumstances, the applicants are not entitled for anticipatory bail.
I have considered the submissions of learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Non-bailable warrants have been issued against the applicant because they were not cooperating with the investigating agency. Thereafter, they evaded the execution of warrant and was absconding, therefore, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. was also issued on 24.03.2021. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lavesh v. State (NCT of Delhi) - (2012) 8 SCC 730 has held as follows:
"10. From these materials and information, it is clear that the present appellant was not available for interrogation and investigation and declared as "absconder". Normally, when the accused is "absconding" and declared as a "proclaimed offender", there is no question of granting anticipatory bail. We reiterate that when a person against whom a warrant had been issued and is absconding or concealing himself in order to avoid execution of warrant and declared as a proclaimed offender in terms of Section 82 of the Code is not entitled the relief of anticipatory bail."
In view of the above position of law, if a person against whom a warrant has been issued and is absconding or concealing himself in order to avoid execution of warrant and declared as "absconder" under Section 82 of Cr.P.C., he is not entitled to relief of anticipatory bail.
Consequently, looking to the fact that the applicants were not cooperating with the investigation, which led to issuance of NBW against them and even thereafter they did not appear, then proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C. was issued, I do not find it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.
The instant anticipatory bail application is accordingly rejected.
Order Date :- 3.8.2021 akverma