An anticipatory bail application was dismissed. The court held that the present case is not fit for granting anticipatory bail till the end of the trial, though the application filed below should be decided in light of the Satender Kumar Antil judgment.
Application was disposed of as it was not a fit case for anticipatory bail until the end of the trial.
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. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1904 of 2023 Applicant :- Saurav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pramod Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA and perused the material available on record.
Present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant - Saurav in Case Crime No. 230 of 2019 under Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act, 1955, Police Station- Gulawathi, District- Bulandshahr.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has no concern with the present matter. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. It is further submitted that charge-sheet has been submitted in the matter. Applicant's case is squarely covered under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Criminal history of one case is explained in the affidavit. It is further submitted that if the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest any time.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer.
I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record carefully.
In this matter, as is evident from the record, offences levelled against the applicant are of Section3/7 Essential Commodities Act, 1955, which are punishable with the imprisonment upto seven years. The applicant has accorded his co-operation in the investigation. In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1 , the Hon'ble Apex Court has
settled the controversy finally by holding the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.
It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial.
It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, llikelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.
Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, in my view, it is not a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till the end of the trial.
However, it is observed that the bail application of the applicant, if moved, shall be considered and decided by the Court concerned in terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825 .
On the basis of request of the learned counsel for the applicant, it is further directed that the Court concerned while considering the bail application of the applicant in the light of Satender Kumar Antil case (supra), shall pass an order strictly in compliance of the directions given in the aforesaid judgement by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in letter and spirit, particularly complying with the order dated 21.3.2023 of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid matter.
The application stands disposed of accordingly.
Order Date :- 29.3.2023//Fhd
Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted for the applicant in the pending criminal proceedings under Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
Whether the applicant qualifies for bail until the conclusion of the trial.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and anotherApplied¶9
(2020) 5 SCC 1 · Who else cites this
Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and anotherFollowed¶14
2022 SCC OnLine SC 825 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Saurav
Nalin Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Nalin Kumar Srivastava
Parties & counsel
