Allahabad High Court
Salman vs State Of U.P. on 17 September, 2019
Author: Rajul Bhargava
Bench: Rajul Bhargava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35221 of 2019 Applicant :- Salman Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Mani Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri K.M. Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the first information report as well as rejection order.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R., the abductee is grown up man aged about 35 years and he came back of his own after three days of the incident and his statement was recorded, he did not even name any accused in his statement and has stated that the accused used to keep their faces covered and he has also been pressurized to get 25 kg. gold from his father for his release. It is argued that subsequently after three months of the incident the victim has again stated that he had recognized voice of one of the accused, who happens to be applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant and abductee are belonging to same village and are very well known to each other yet his name did not surface at the earliest point of time. He further submitted that there is nothing to show that the victim had identified any of the assailant and the applicant may be required for custodial interrogation and may be put up for identification by the victim. He further submitted that it is a case in which there is no exchange of ransom and merely demand was made for his release. It is argued that infact entire case has been concocted by the first informant for extraneous reason. The applicant has no criminal history. He undertakes to fully cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the I.O. as and when called by him.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is embargo of grant of anticipatory bail u/s 364-A IPC to which counsel for the applicant states that from the gamut of circumstances, prima facie, offence u/s 364-A IPC is not made out as far as the applicant is concerned as there is no reliable evidence of any demand of dowry or his active participation in the abduction of the victim.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and having no criminal antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.
In the event of arrest of the applicant Salman involved in Case Crime No. 191 of 2018, u/s 364-A, 377, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Jigna, District Mirzapur shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report if any under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(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 default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order independently without being prejudice by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.
The applicant is directed to produce a certified copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.
Let the copy of this order be sent by the Registrar General of this Court to Sessions Judge concerned for it's compliance.
It is clarified that whatever is discussed or observed hereinabove, is only prima facie view of this Court and at this stage it shall not amount to any expression or opinion on the merit of the case.
Order Date :- 17.9.2019 Dhirendra/