Allahabad High Court
Shailendra Kumar vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 8 November, 2024
Author: Samit Gopal
Bench: Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:175398 Court No. - 80 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 10871 of 2024 Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Daga,Devendra Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
1. Heard Sri Amit Daga, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ajay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the material on record.
2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant- Shailendra Kumar, with the following prayer:-
"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow instant application and grant anticipatory bail to Applicant directing the Station House Officer/Arresting Officer to release and admit the Applicant on bail till conclusion of trial before the Court below, in the event of his arrest, on such terms and conditions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in relation to F.I.R. dated 23.03.2021, registered as Case Crime No. 121 of 2021, for the offence punishable under Sections 7/13 Prevention of Corruption Act at Police Station- Kotwali Dehat, District- Etah, so that justice be done, otherwise Applicant will suffer irreparable loss and hard injury, which cannot be compensated in any terms.
And/or this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pass such other or further order, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case."
3. Prior notice of this anticipatory bail application was served in the office of the learned Government Advocate, High Court, Allahabad and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P., this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned State counsel as per Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. (U. P. Amendment) is not required since learned counsel for the State informs the Court that he has received the required instructions in the matter.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the first information report of the present matter was lodged on 23.03.2021, under Sections 384, 336, 342, 211 I.P.C. and Section 7/13 Prevention of Corruption Act and during investigation the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act were dropped and the applicant was granted bail vide order dated 26.03.2021 passed by the In-charge Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah for offences under Sections 389, 211, 342, 323, 504, 506, 167, 120-B I.P.C. in his first bail application No. 1559 of 2021 (Shailendra Kumar Vs. State of U.P.). It is submitted that subsequently the investigation concluded and a charge-sheet dated 30.11.2023 was submitted against the applicant and other co-accused persons. In so far as the applicant and two co-accused are concerned, charge-sheet has been submitted against them for offences under Sections 211, 120-B, 167, 323, 342, 389, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 7/13 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. It is submitted that the court concerned vide order dated 08.07.2024 took cognizance upon the same and summoned the applicant and others for offences under Sections 120-B, 167, 211, 323, 342, 389, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 7/13 Prevention of Corruption Act and co-accused Pradeep Yadav @ Bantu under Sections 120-B, 167, 211, 389 I.P.C. & Section 7/13 Prevention of Corruption Act. It is submitted that the applicant then appeared before the trial court concerned on 13.08.2024 and 02.09.2024 as would appear from the order-sheet of the trial court but subsequently on 04.09.2024 he did not appear and on the very first date i.e. 04.09.2024 non-bailable warrant has been issued against him which is continuing till date. It is submitted that the applicant has no intention to abscond. The intention of the applicant is writ large for co-operating in the trial in as much as he appeared before the trial court on two dates after summoning but due to some reasons subsequently he could not appear. It is submitted that the applicant was granted bail in other sections except for the offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act and did not misuse the same. The applicant is having a criminal history of one case which has been challenged before this Court in a writ petition which is pending disposal, paragraph 64 of the affidavit has been placed for the same.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that initially a first information report was lodged against the applicant under Sections 384, 336, 342, 211 I.P.C. and Section 7/13 Prevention of Corruption Act and during investigation the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act were dropped and the applicant was granted bail by the court concerned. Subsequently the investigation concluded and a charge-sheet was submitted against the applicant and other co-accused persons. Except for the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act which were deleted during investigation, the applicant was granted bail and later on the said sections were added in the charge-sheet.
7. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the nature of accusation, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.
8. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Shailendra Kumar, involved in aforesaid case crime no. shall be released on anticipatory bail till the period of trial 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 make himself available on each and every date fixed in the matter by the court concerned.
(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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court.
(iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport the same shall be deposited by him before the concerned court.
9. In case, the applicant does not co-operate in the proceedings of the trial, this order shall stand automatically recalled/vacated and the applicant shall be taken into custody, forthwith.
10. Further, in default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.
11. The court concerned to proceed in the matter independently without being prejudice by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.
12. The present anticipatory bail application is allowed.
Order Date :- 8.11.2024 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.)