The single judge disposed of an interim application filed to enforce an earlier order granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant in a case under the Essential Commodities Act, holding that he should be released on bail in terms of the prior order.
The applicant was held to be released on anticipatory bail in terms of the order dated 13.07.2020.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4184 of 2020
Applicant :- Ashok Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
"Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.
This Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under section 438 Cr.P.C. has been moved by the applicant after rejection of his anticipatory bail application vide order dated 20.6.2020 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (Essential Commodities Act) Varanasi seeking anticipatory bail in case crime no. 0189 of 2020, under sections 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act, Police Station Rohaniya, District Varanasi during the pendency of investigation.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that on 15.05.2020, an FIR was lodged by the Supply Inspector for offence under section 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act against Mithai Singh, Ravi (driver), Ashok Yadav (applicant) and Kailash Patel. It is next submitted that the essential commodities in question have been recovered from the possession of coaccused Mithai Singh. Applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case as he is neither the contractor nor fair price shop dealer. Applicant is the owner of vehicle No. UP 65 D.T. 5450 through which the recovered essential commodities were being transported from one place to another. It is also submitted that applicant has no concern with the loss and profit of the recovered essential commodities. Applicant has no criminal history to his credit. Lastly, it is submitted that he has apprehension of imminent arrest and in case, applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty and would cooperate with the investigation.
Learned Additional Government Advocate, who has accepted notice of this case on behalf of State of U.P. has opposed the prayer for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant.
Looking to the facts of the case, reasonable apprehension of arrest, taking into consideration the gravity and nature of accusation, there being no criminal antecedents of the applicant and there being no possibility of his fleeing from justice, this court is of the view that at this stage prima facie case for exercising its discretionary power under Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure is made out in favour of applicant.
Learned Additional Government Advocate prays for and is granted four weeks' time to file counter affidavit. Learned A.G.A. shall communicate this order to the investigating officer of the case and Superintendent of Police concerned. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within two
weeks thereafter.
List this case on 25.08.2020 before the appropriate Bench.
Till the next date of listing, in the event of arrest of the applicant Ashok Yadav involved in the aforesaid case shall be released on interim 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.
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 leave India without the previous permission of the court;
4)In default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officers shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
It is made clear that in case certified copy of this order is not issued due to COVID-19 pandemic, the copy of order downloaded by the official website of the Allahabad High Court shall be acted upon."
Order Date :- 19.10.2020 Abhilash
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant satisfies the criteria for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in light of the rejection of his earlier application.
Whether the applicant can be granted interim anticipatory bail while waiting for the final disposal of the matter.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ashok Yadav
Saumitra Dayal Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
