HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 44335 of 2019
Applicant :- Neeshu
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Avinash Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Vipin Sinha,J.
Sri Dhiraj Kumar Pandey, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of complainant is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dhiraj Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri Patanjali Mishra, learned A. G. A. for the State
Applicant has moved the present anticipatory bail application seeking bail in Case Crime No. 60 of 2019, under Section 498A, Section323, Section354, Section376, Section511 IPC and 3/4 D.P.Act, P.S. Mahilla Thana, District Saharanpur.
I have perused the prosecution story as set up in the F.I.R. and also the anticipatory bail rejection order.
Contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case; that applicant happens to be the devar of the victim; that there is matrimonial dispute between the husband and wife and husband is not a party in the present case; that applicant has no previous criminal history the matter needs deeper and fairer investigation before any arrest should be given effect to.
Learned AGA 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, Neeshu 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 :- 23.10.2019