Allahabad High Court
Dharam Kumar vs State Of U.P. And Another on 23 August, 2023
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:169454 Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9575 of 2023 Applicant :- Dharam Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Umesh Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. Heard Sri Vikas Tiwari, learned Advocate holding brief for Sri Umesh Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.
2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 27 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 188, 353, 323, 332, 504, 506, 34, 120-B IPC, 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act and 126 Representation of People Act, Police Station Kakarbai, District Jhansi, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive and has the apprehension of his arrest. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. The applicant is not named in the FIR. His name has come up in the statement of the co-accused person. It is next stated that two FIRs bearing Case Crime Nos. 26 of 2021 and 27 of 2021 have been instituted for one and the same occurrence and in the same evening of Panchayat elections, as such, the applicant has been subjected to double jeopardy. It is stated that that applicant has been enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 26 of 2021, copy of the order whereof is annexed as Annexure-2 to the affidavit accompanying the application. Learned counsel has stated that the present FIR is barred by Section 300 Cr.P.C.
4. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that the applicant has no other criminal antecedents. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, he will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.
5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.
6. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98", the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.
7. Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed.
8. In the event of arrest of the applicant, Dharam Kumar involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-
i. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
ii. 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;
iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;
iv. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
v. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
vi. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.
10. It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
(Justice Krishan Pahal) Order Date :- 23.8.2023 Shalini