Court No. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 18552 of 2021 Applicant :- Brijesh Pundir Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Singh,Suresh Chandra Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case No. 226 of 2011 arising out of Case Crime No. 585 of 2010, under sections 147, 148, 427 IPC & Section 3/4 Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, 1984, Police Station- Pilkhuwa, District- Hapur.
Facts in brief are that on 28.10.2010 at 11.40 a.m. at Rajputana Regiment Inter College, applicant along with other co-accused persons were throwing stones at gate from outside and they caused damage to the roadways bus bearing no. UP14AR9446. He alongwith other co-accused persons was prevented by the police but did not stop. As a result F.I.R. was lodged by the police and after investigation charge sheet was submitted.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Investigating Officer has not properly investigated the case and submitted the charge sheet illegally and the court concerned has taken the cognizance. All witnesses are Government employees. No any independent witness has been examined. During investigation, due to political influence the name of applicant has been illegally implicated in this case, though he was student at that time. Offences are punishable with imprisonment which may extend to 7 years. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicant is under apprehension of imminent arrest. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the trial.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and urged that now, after collection of evidence, charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant and cognizance has also been taken but applicant is avoiding the process of court,, therefore they are not entitled for anticipatory bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and gravity of offence, this Court is of the view that the case is not made out for anticipatory bail. Hence the anticipatory bail application of applicant Brijesh Pundir is hereby rejected.
However, if he moves bail application before the trial court, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously as far as possible in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 22.12.2021 A. Singh