Allahabad High Court
Imran @ Imran Malik vs State Of U.P. And Another on 8 July, 2022
Author: Rajesh Singh Chauhan
Bench: Rajesh Singh Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4556 of 2022 Applicant :- Imran @ Imran Malik Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mukesh Joshi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Mukesh Joshi, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
By means of present anticipatory bail application, the applicant has shown his apprehension of arrest in Case Crime No. 537 of 2021 u/s 365, 323, 342IPC, P.S. Katghar, District Moradabad. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as she has not committed any offence alleged in the F.I.R.
It has been further submitted that the allegations leveled in the F.I.R. are quite different from the statement of the victim who has been recovered next day from the date of incident. As per the statement of the victim one accused Shakeel Chikna has detained him so as to recover some amount which was said to have been outstanding against him, however, nothing is outstanding against him. In his statement the victim has stated that some more persons were present at the place of incident including the present applicant. He has also submitted that offence under which the F.I.R. has been lodged is having punishment of below seven years, then in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Arnesh Kumar V State Of Bihar (2014) 8 Scc 273 and in re; Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr., Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5191/2021 he could not be arrested. He has further submitted that he shall cooperate with the investigation and if his liberty is protected, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant / complainant opposed the prayer of learned counsel for the applicant and has submitted that the specific allegations have been leveled against the present applicant, therefore, the applicant may be directed to properly cooperate with the investigation.
Be that as it may, since the investigation is still going on and the offence under which the F.I.R. has been lodged is having punishment of less than seven years, therefore, the police authority / investigating officer should abide by the provisions of section 41A Cr.P.C. as well as the dictum of Apex Court in re : Arnesh Kumar and Satender Kumar Antil (supra). However, it is also necessary to observe that unless and until the accused person cooperates with the investigation properly, no police report, if any can be filed, therefore, it is incumbent upon the applicant to cooperate with the investigation properly.
Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail is disposed of finally directing the applicant to cooperate with the investigation and it is also expected that the Investigating Officer shall abide by the dictum dictum of Apex Court in re: Arnesh Kumar and Satender Kumar Antil (supra).
.
[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 8.7.2022 Om.