HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 49927 of 2019
Applicant :- Irfan
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sikandar Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A. G. A. for the State.
Applicant has moved the present anticipatory bail application seeking bail in Case Crime No. 771 of 2019, under Sections 498A, Section452, Section354a, Section376, Section323, Section504, Section506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District Bulandshahar.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the marriage between the applicant and the informant was solemnized about 9 years before. It is next contended that when the informant failed to persuade her husband to live with her in her parental home, she lodged an FIR containing absolutely false and concocted allegations roping in the entire family of her husband including the applicant alleging commission of offences by all of them under Sections 498A, Section452, Section354a, Section323, Section504, Section506 IPC. The specific allegation regarding commission of offence under Section 376 IPC has been made by her against her brother-in-law, Aamir alone. As far as the applicant is concerned, the allegation made against him is not warranted by any material on record. Moreover, the applicant has no criminal antecedent to his credit, is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. The matter needs deeper and fairer investigation before any arrest should be given effect to.
Learned A. G. A. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant.
It has been consistently held that the plentitude of Section 438 CrPC must be given its full play. There is no requirement that the accused must make out a “special case” for the exercise of the power to grant anticipatory bail as it virtually, reduces the salutary power conferred by Section 438 CrPC to a dead letter.
Keeping in view the reasons as stated above, the facts and circumstances of the case as have been discussed at the Bar of this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the nature of accusation, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.
In the event of arrest of the applicant, Irfan involved in the aforesaid case, he shall be released on anticipatory bail 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 will join and participate in each and every aspect of “Investigation” and will lend full assistance to the Investigating Agency even with regard to “discovery of fact” if and when required so by the Investigating Agency or the concerned court;
(ii) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
iii) 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;
(iv) 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 or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/Investigating Officer/first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
Order Date :- 16.11.2019