Allahabad High Court
Vikas Kumar Rathi vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 April, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2036 of 2023 Applicant :- Vikas Kumar Rathi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Bhuvnesh Kumar Singh,Jitendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant - Vikas Kumar Rathi seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.528 of 2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Section 4/10 of the Examination Act, 1982, Police Station New Agra, District Agra.
It has been argued 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. Investigation is going on in the matter. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
It appears from the perusal of the record that the applicant is a student and in his place, some imposter appeared in the examination. However, it reveals from the record that on the date of occurrence, the applicant was sick and the medical certificate alongwith supplementary affidavit has been filed to show that on the date of occurrence, the applicant was not fit to appear in the examination and he has no concern with the alleged offence. Investigation of the case is going on. Custodial interrogation of the applicant prima facie not appears to be required. It is submitted before the Court that the applicant is ready and willing to cooperate in the investigation of the case. No criminal history against the applicant has been brought to the knowledge of the Court.
In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held 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, likelihood 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.
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 filing of charge sheet in the matter.
The application is allowed.
In the event of arrest of the applicant, 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 Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.
(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/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office.
(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 S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.
In case of default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of interim protection granted to the applicant.
Order Date :- 13.4.2023 ss