Heard Sri V.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajeev Upadhyay, counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 184 of 2017, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 307 IPC and 7 Crl. Law Amendment Act, Police Station Kotwali Fatehgarh, District Farrukhabad with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.
I have perused the FIR as well as the order by means of which the anticipatory bail application has been rejected by the court below.
Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that even if the allegations made in the F.I.R. are assumed to be true infact no offence u/s 307 IPC is made out inasmuch as the injury and x-ray report of the injured is procured one and in this behalf radiologist Dr. Yogendra Singh of Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital has submitted report to C.M.O., Farrukhabad that injured was pressured for preparing fake x-ray report to show that foreign body was caused by firearm, which is annexed as annexure-7 to the affidavit, therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
Per contra, learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that the applicant and other accused has challenged the present F.I.R. in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 4422 of 2017 in which same grounds were taken, however, the said writ petition was dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 30.3.2017. Thereafter, the applicant and other accused suppressing the fact of dismissal of earlier writ petition filed another Crl. Misc. Writ Petition no. 3387 of 2019, which was disposed of vide order dated 7.2.2019 with the direction to the applicant and other accused to surrender before the court below and move an application for bail within two weeks, which shall be decided in accordance with law. The applicant did not comply with the order dated 7.2.2019 and the court issued non bailable warrant of arrest, which order dated 16.3.2019 was challenged by the applicant and one other accused in Application u/s 482 No. 12049 of 2019, which was disposed of vide order dated 2.4.2019 with direction that if the applicants surrender before the court below within a period of 15 days from today and apply for bail, their bail application shall be heard and decided.
Learned counsel for the informant states that the applicant has been flouting the orders of the Court with impunity and besides it, he has long criminal history of several cases though in para-19 of the affidavit it is stated that except the present case no other criminal case is pending nor in any criminal case the applicant has been convicted.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I may record that from the background of the case and the manner in which the applicant has been flouting the orders of the Court continuously there is every possibility of applicant fleeing from justice and he does not deserve for any indulgence of the Court for grant of anticipatory bail.
Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is rejected.
Order Date :- 27.9.2019 Dhirendra/