Nadeem Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

Nadeem Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted to applicant Nadeem till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., on a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to stated conditions; liberty to the Investigating Officer to seek cancellation in default.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Nadeem is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in Case Crime No. 02 of 2022, Police Station Partapur, District Meerut, under Sections 147, 341, 283, 332, 353, 427 IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act.

Court's answer

Without making any comment on the merits, and considering the facts, circumstances and submissions of counsel and the A.G.A., the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail for a limited period, in view of the exception considered by the Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

Ratio / Principle

In the event of arrest, the applicant Nadeem shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer concerned, subject to conditions (availability for interrogation, no inducement/threat/promise, no leaving India without permission and deposit of passport); in default, the Investigating Officer may apply for cancellation.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail - Section 438 Cr.P.C. - Applicant sought pre-arrest bail in Case Crime No. 02 of 2022, Police Station Partapur, District Meerut, under Sections 147, 341, 283, 332, 353, 427 IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, arising from an F.I.R. lodged on 04.01.2022 after the death of one Shaukeen in a road accident at Kashi Toll Plaza on the Delhi Meerut Expressway, following which villagers blocked the road and damaged vehicles; F.I.R. named 22 persons and 50-60 unknown persons. Held, without commenting on merits and relying on the exception considered by the Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020 SCC Online SC 98, the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail for a limited period, i.e., till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., on a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions of availability for interrogation, abstention from inducement/threat/promise, and no departure from India without permission (passport to be deposited); in default, the Investigating Officer may move for cancellation.

Court No. - 80

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12072 of 2022

Applicant :- Nadeem Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Sisodia,Gayyoor Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.02 of 2022, under sections 147, 341, 283, 332, 353, 427 I.P.C. & Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Partapur, District Meerut, during the pendency of trial.

Facts in brief are that 04.01.2022 an F.I.R. was lodged by the police that on Delhi Meerut Expressway at Kashi Toll Plaza near Saulana village one Shaukeen was died in a road accident on account of which some villagers blocked the road and also caused damage to the vehicles plying on the road.

It is submitted that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case though he has committed no offence. The present F.I.R. was lodged against 22 named and 50-60 unknown persons. There is no evidence on record to show that this applicant had also caused damage to the vehicles which were plying on the road on the date of alleged incident. It is also submitted that the matter is under investigation and, therefore, the applicant is under apprehension of imminent arrest. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate with the investigation.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and without making any comment on the merit of the case, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case for the limited period considering the exception considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98.

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Nadeem, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., on 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 shall make himself available for interrogation by a police office as and when required;

(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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office;

(iii) 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 of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

Order Date :- 19.1.2023 Ashok Gupta

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad