Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38008 of 2019 Applicant :- Arvind Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Neeraj Kumar Srivastava,Pankaj Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
This application, for anticipatory bail, under section 438 Cr.P.C., has been filed by the accused-applicant, Arvind, with a prayer for grant of anticipatory bail , during the course of investigation in Case Crime No. 44 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366, and 368 of IPC, Police Station Sayyadraja, District Chandauli.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is innocent; he has been falsely implicated for offnece, punishable, under Sections 363, 366 and 368 of IPC, because it has been said that it was Satish @ Gurucharan, who enticed and taken away the prosecutorix, whereas, applicant-accused and other co-accused have been assigned role of harbouring accused-Satish @ Gurucharan, while another case has also been lodged from the side of accused for kidnapping Satish @ Gurucharan as he was missing. Accused- applicant is having no criminal antecedents and has no concern with present case. Hence, a prayer, for anticipatory bail, during investigation of the present case crime number, has been made.
Learned AGA, representing the State, has vehemently opposed prayer for anticipatory bail.
Having heard learned counsel for both sides and gone through first information report as well as rejection order, passed by the trial court, it is apparent that role assigned to the present accused-applicant was of giving harbour to the accused, who has taken the minor prosecutorix, by enticing her, whereas, another case crime number was also got registered for kidnapping of the accused- Satish @ Gurucharan, who alleged to have kidnapped the prosecutorix, with a view to murder him.
Under all above facts and circumstances, without commenting on merits of the case, it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail, during investigation of the present case crime number.
In the event of arrest of the applicant, Arvind, involved in above mentioned case, he 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 his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 20,000/-, with two sureties, each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with 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 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.
The applicant is directed to produce a certified copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P.
concerned, within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.
In view of aforesaid, the application for anticipatory bail is, accordingly, allowed.
Order Date :- 30.9.2019 bgs/