Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10196 of 2021 Applicant :- Smt. Kalawati And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This anticipatory bail application has been given by the applicants - Smt. Kalawati, Ram Babu and Hari Babu in Case Crime No. 95 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 307 I.P.C., P.S.- Baradari, District - Bareilly.
An FIR has been lodged in respect of incident dated 28.1.2020 on the same day naming all the three applicants with the allegations that the accused person with weapons in their hands came on their plot and assaulted them by sharp weapons and also fired by a country made pistol. In the incident, Shanti Devi, Gulab Shankar, Pintu and Rahul Solanki sustained injuries and thinking that Shanti Devi and Gulab Shankar who had fallen on ground died, the accused person ran away from the place. Therefore, the first information report was lodged on the same day.
Submission of learned counsel is that Injury report has been filed and in the opinion of the Doctor, the injuries were caused by hard and blunt object and all the injuries of the injured persons have been found to be simple in nature. Submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that both the sides belong to the same family and there is a property dispute between both the sides and on that count, the applicants have been falsely implicted on the basis of general allegations of 'marpit'. Further submission is that looking to the nature of injuries and the weapon used, prima-facie a case for anticipatory bail is made out in favour of the applicants. It is further submitted that applicants have no criminal history and applicants are prepared to furnish sureties and bonds, there is no possibility of their either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the evidence.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayed of bail and has submitted that it is an incident of 28.1.2020 and already about 20 months have passed and no serious effort has been made for the arrest of the applicant. Submission is that there is no real threat of arrest of the applicants and their anticipatory bail is liable to be rejected.
Considering the submissions of both the sides. It is clear that already about 20 months have passed passed after the incident has taken place. It is clear that till now none of the applicants have been arrested nor there is anything on record to show that serious effort has been made by the police to arrest them. It is, therefore, clear that there is no real threat of arrest of the applicants. It is pertinent to mention here that the anticipatory bail is not a substitute of a regular bail and the applicants are supposed to give cogent and extra-ordinary reasons for seeking the remedy of anticipatory bail. No extraordinary reasons have been shown. There is no real threat of arrest.
Forum of regular bail is available to the applicants, as such, I do not find any ground for giving benefit of anticipatory bail, hence the anticipatory bail application filed by the applicants is rejected.
Order Date :- 28.7.2021 nd