Allahabad High Court
F.M. Haresh Kumar Singh vs State Of U.P. on 2 May, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 342 of 2020 Applicant :- F.M. Haresh Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Neeraj Kumar Srivastava,Pankaj Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.
This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant F.M. Haresh Kumar Singh seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.17 of 2019, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, P.S.- Chopan, District- Sonbhadra.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
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. The investigation of the case is going-on and charge-sheet has not been filed. It has been submitted that in case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.
It is alleged in the F.I.R. that though the accused applicant is the employee of the Fire Station Chopan, executed some forged certificates regarding the working condition of fire extinguishers in certain firms/establishments.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the accused applicant that no such certificate has been issued by him as alleged in the F.I.R. It is further submitted that in the departmental proceedings, he has been exonerated and no offence was found against him. It is further submitted that investigation of the case has terminated into charge sheet. He has cooperated with the investigation. It is further submitted that now the custodial interrogation of the case is not required after filing of the charge sheet. It is further submitted that accused applicant has no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the controversy finally by holding the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.
It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial.
It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court 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, llikelihood 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.
Hence, 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 the submission of charge sheet in the matter.
The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, 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 the Station House Officer concerned with the following conditions :-
1. The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.
2. 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.
3. The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
4. The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5. The applicant shall not leave India without prior 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 breach of any of the above conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail of the applicant in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 2.5.2023 Shivangi