Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for State.
The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed with a prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant, Brajesh Kumar Gautam in Case Crime No.0007/2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Bhareh, District Etawah.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the sole reason for lodging first information report is the order passed by District Education Officer with the allegation that at the time of verification of applicant's appointment, his candidature was not found at her roll number in the office of Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad. He further submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has no previous criminal history. The applicant has definite apprehension that he may be arrested by the police any time. Under the similar set of facts co- accused Rashmi Verma has been admitted to bail by coordinate Bench of this Court on 28.6.2021 in Criminal Miscellaneous Anticipatory Bail Application No.11235 of 2021, copy whereof has been produced by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant. He has submitted that in view of the seriousness of the allegations made against the applicant, she is not entitled to grant of anticipatory bail. The apprehension of the applicant is not founded on any material on record. Only on the basis of imaginary fear, anticipatory bail cannot be granted.
After considering the rival submissions, this Court finds that there is a case registered against the applicant. It cannot be definitely said when the police may apprehend her. After lodging of F.I.R., the arrest can be made by the police at will. There is no definite period fixed for the police to arrest an accused against whom an F.I.R. has been lodged. The courts have repeatedly held that arrest should be the last option for the police and it should be restricted to those exceptional cases where arresting the accused is imperative or his custodial interrogation is required. Irrational and indiscriminate arrests are gross violation of human rights. In the case of Joginder Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1994 SC 1349, the Apex Court has referred to the third report of National Police Commission, wherein it is mentioned that arrest by the police in India is one of the chief source of corruption in the police. The report suggested that, by and large, nearly 60 percent of the arrests were either unnecessary or unjustified and that such unjustified police action accounted for 43.2 percent of expenditure of the jails. Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental rights and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative. According to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the arrest of an accused should be made.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and her antecedent, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail for limited period in this case considering the exceptions considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.
In the event of arrest, the applicant- Brajesh Kumar Gautam shall be released on anticipatory bail till cognizance is taken by the competent Court on the police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. 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 Court with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by the 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if she has passport, the same shall be deposited by her before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.
(iv) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(v) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing. In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/Govt. Advocate is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.
The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation, if pending, of the present case in accordance with law, expeditiously, independently without being prejudiced by any observations made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.
The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order downloaded from the official website of this Court before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, if investigation is in progress, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.
Order Date :- 27.8.2021 Raj