Allowed

Shrikrishna Mittal v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Jul 2022ABAIL/2387/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Sacred bench confirmed an interim anticipatory bail order making it absolute. The court noted the applicant was falsely implicated, had no criminal history, and cooperative attitude. Bail granted until charge sheet filing or trial conclusion.

What did the court decide?

The interim anticipatory bail order was made absolute until the filing of the charge sheet or conclusion of the trial.

Shrikrishna Mittal Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2387 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shrikrishna Mittal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Bharti Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶6

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court towards the order dated 06.05.2022 passed by this Court in the instant case granting interim anticipatory bail to the present applicant. For the convenience, the order dated 06.05.2022 is being reproduced herein below:-

¶7

"Heard Shri Pankaj Bharti, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant an anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Shrikrishna Mittal in Case Crime No. 446 of 2018, under Sections 3/7, Essential Commodities Act, 1955, Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, IPC, Section 39 The Aadhar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 and Section 66(C) Information Technology Act, 2000, Police Station - Parikshitgarh, District - Meerut after rejecting anticipatory bail application of the applicant by Special Judge (E.C. Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut vide order dated 16.2.2022.

¶9

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant is not fair price shop dealer. Applicant is husband of the fair price shop dealer, co-accused Vijay Lakshmi. It is further submitted that as per allegation of first information report, food grains were distributed, but card holders units have been cancelled. It is further submitted that co-accused Vijay Lakshmi has been granted anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.11.2021 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 17220 of 2021. The applicant is not named in the first information report. The applicant is no more required for custodial interrogation. The applicant has no criminal history and he is not convicted in any cognizable offence.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant, but could not point out anything adverse against the applicant.

¶11

Prior notice of this bail application was served in the office of Government Advocate and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad

¶12

High Court rules and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Vs. State of U.P., hence, this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned A.G.A. as per Section 438(3), Cr.P.C. (U.P. Amendment) is not required.

¶13

It is settled position of law that the anticipatory bail being an extraordinary privilege should be granted only in exceptional cases. Parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offence are required to be satisfied, where the Court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has falsely roped in the crime and would not misuse his liberty.

¶14

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98, ground for grant of ad interim anticipatory bail is made out.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. to file counter affidavit within two weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within one week thereafter.

¶16

Put up on 30.5.2022 as fresh for final hearing.

¶17

In case of arrest, the applicant, Shrikrishna Mittal is directed to be enlarged on interim anticipatory bail till the hearing of the present application in above case crime number, on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two sureties each of like amount before the Station House Officer of Police Station/Court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶18

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required, if investigation is in progress;

¶19

(ii) 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 such person from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶20

(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country 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/Court concerned;

¶21

(iv) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant along-with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked ;

¶22

(v) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶23

The Investigating Officer will continue with the investigation, if it is in progress and will not be affected by this order.

¶24

A copy of this order shall also be produced before the S.P/S.S.P concerned

¶25

by the applicant, within a week, if the investigation is still in progress, who shall ensure compliance of this order."

¶26

Learned AGA has submitted that he has filed counter affidavit. He has further submitted that investigation is going on against the present applicant, however, against other accused persons, charge sheet has been filed.

¶27

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant is not misusing the interim protection so given and he has been cooperating with the investigation. He has further submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case as he was not named in the FIR. He has further submitted that the applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and if any charge sheet is filed against him, he shall cooperate with the trial proceedings. Further, this is a case of 2018 and till date, no credible evidence against the present applicant is available with the investigating agency, therefore, the present applicant has got prima facie case to be granted anticipatory bail. The interim anticipatory bail may be confirmed till filing of the charge sheet, if any and if the charge sheet is filed, such protection may be continued till conclusion of the trial.

¶28

Per contra , learned AGA has opposed the aforesaid request of the learned counsel for the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶29

Therefore, the interim anticipatory bail order dated 06.05.2022 is made absolute till filing of the charge sheet against the applicant, if any and if the charge sheet is filed, then till conclusion of the trial on the same terms and conditions, which have been indicated in the interim anticipatory bail order dated 06.05.2022.

¶30

In the aforesaid terms, the present anticipatory bail application is disposed of .

¶31

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶32

Order Date :- 6.7.2022 RBS/-

¶33

Digitally signed by RAM BIR SINGH Date: 2022.07.06 19:18:39 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shrikrishna Mittal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shrikrishna Mittal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.D. Agarwal Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Ranjana Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sukhpal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Subhash Yadav Vs State of U.P.and Another

Vijaypal Vs State of U.P.

Shivam@ Shubham Gurjar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another