Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 17869 of 2021 Applicant :- Adarsh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shambhavi Nandan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Indra Mani Tripathi,Nagesh Kumar
Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.
Heard Sri Shambhavi Nandan, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Indra Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Abhishek Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicant for enlarging him on bail in Case Crime No.203 of 2021, under Sections 323, 498-A, 307 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Gopiganj, District Bhadohi.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is husband of the deceased and is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive; there is no direct evidence against the applicant. As per medical report, no case is made out under the alleged sections against the applicant. Charge-sheet has not been submitted against the applicant. The applicant has no previous criminal antecedents. As concocted, false and fabricated story has been cooked up to malign the applicant and has been implicated in the present case, as such, there is apprehensive of imminent arrest of the applicant. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the investigation.
Per contra, learned counsel for the informant submits that the victim has been burnt by her husband-applicant and after treatment she left the house of her in-laws.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that applicant is named in the FIR and direct allegation against the applicant. As per medical report it is clear that the victim received burn injury on left whole thigh to knee joint and blister present. Medical report is supporting the contents of FIR, as such, the applicant is not entitled for any indulgence by this Court. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant may be rejected.
The object of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is that a person should not be unnecessarily harassed or humiliated in order to satisfy personal vendetta or grudge of complainant or any other person operating the things directly or from behind the curtains.
It is well settled that discretionary power conferred by the legislature on this Court cannot be put in a straitjacket formula but such discretionary power either grant or refusal of anticipatory bail has to be exercised carefully in appropriate cases with circumspection on the basis of the available material after evaluating the facts of the particular case and considering other relevant factors (nature and gravity of accusation, role attributed to accused, conduct of accused, criminal antecedents, possibility of the applicant to flee from justice, apprehension of tempering of the witnesses or threat to the complainant, impact of grant of anticipatory bail in investigation or society etc.) with meticulous precision maintaining balance between the conflicting interest, namely, sanctity of individual liberty and interest of society.
Without expressing any opinion on merits of the case and considering the submissions advanced, the nature and gravity of the accusation, I find no good ground for anticipatory bail to the applicant in the aforesaid case.
Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant- Adarsh, involved in Case Crime No.203 of 2021, under Sections 323, 498-A, 307 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Gopiganj, District Bhadohi is hereby rejected.
Order Date :- 22.12.2021 Nitin Verma