HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 48015 of 2019
Applicant :- Sunil Tripathi @ Sunil Pati Tripathi And 4 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Vipin Sinha,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Dev Raj Singh, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri Jhamman Ram, learned A. G. A. for the State
Applicants has moved the present anticipatory bail application seeking bail in Case Crime No. 908 of 2019, under Section 498A, Section323, Section504, Section506 IPC and 3/4 D.P.Act, P.S. Meja, District Prayagraj.
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 applicants is that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case; that applicant no. 1 is husband, applicant no. 2 father-in-law, applicant no.3 mother-in-law, applicant no. 4 and 5 are nanad; that there is a matrimonial dispute between the parties and general allegations have been made in the FIR; much reliance has been placed on the averments made in paragraph no. 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 of the application; it has not been disputed that first informant is living in her maika for last three years; 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 applicants.
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 applicants, Sunil Tripathi @ Sunil Pati Tripathi, Jaishankar, Vijaya Devi, Madhuri Tripathi and Priti Tripathi involved in the aforesaid case, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their 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 applicants 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 applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
iii) the applicants 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;
(iv) the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport the same shall be deposited by them 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 applicants.
Order Date :- 11.11.2019