Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1316 (ALL)

Deepak Kumar v. State of U. P.

2022-08-18

RAJ BEER SINGH

body2022
JUDGMENT : RAJ BEER SINGH, J. 1. Counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for the complainant, today is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 114 of 2022, under Sections-147, 148, 323, 427, 341, 504, 506, 120-B, 307, 386 I.P.C. Police Station-Ganga Nagar, District-Meerut with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. According to prosecution version, on 06.05.2022 at 9.55 A.M. while the complainant was going to his office, he was stopped by five persons, who came in a car, and they have assaulted the complainant and his driver. Learned counsel submitted that in fact there is dispute between the complainant Anil Sharma and one Amit Kasana regarding a liquor shop and that applicant is employee in the said liquor shop. Referring to injury report of the complainant, it is pointed out that injured has sustained merely simple injuries and thus, no case under Section 307 IPC is made out. Only general and omnibus role has been assigned to all the five accused persons and that no specific role has been assigned to applicant. Referring to the alleged photographs of C.C.T.V. footage, it was submitted that there was no C.C.T.V. footage at the alleged spot and in fact the alleged footage has been produced by the complainant. The applicant has no motive to assault the complainant. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and that no coercive process has been issued against the applicant so far. The applicant undertakes to co-operate during investigation and trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate during investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the application for anticipatory bail and argued that applicant is named in the first information report. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate during investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the application for anticipatory bail and argued that applicant is named in the first information report. It was submitted that applicant and co-accused persons have assaulted the complainant and caused injuries to him and that they often used to indulge in extortion of money. Learned counsel for the complainant has referred the photographs annexed with counter affidavit and submitted that applicant often used to roam having weapons. The first information report has been lodged without any undue delay. It was submitted that due to the acts of the accused persons, there is terror in the mind of complainant. The complainant is working as General Manager in Chaddha Company (liquor shop) and that brother of co-accused Sumit Kasana was having liquor shop in Ganga Nagar and his license was also renewed but the accused persons have pressurized the complainant to pay extortion money. 6. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694 , it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration. 7. In the instant case, 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 on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 8. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 9. In the event of arrest of applicant Deepak Kumar involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 8. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 9. In the event of arrest of applicant Deepak Kumar involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- 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 officer 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 him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. (iii) the applicant would co-operate during investigation and trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. 10. In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.