1. Heard Sri V. K. Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. on behalf of the State.
2. The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail as the applicants are apprehending their arrest in connection with F.I.R./Case Crime No.144 of 2020, under Sections-323, 504, 506, 324, 326, 308 of I.P.C., Police Station Sirsiya, District Shrawasti.
3. It has been stated in the first information report that on 18.8.2020 there was a dispute amongst the children who were playing wherein the accused started fighting with the son of the complainant due to which the son of the complainant received serious injuries and also one of his fingers was amputated and fell unconscious. During the investigation it has come on record that the Kandhai has been given the role of hitting with axe due to which son of the complainant fell unconscious and one of his fingers got amputated and the role of catching hold the injured has been given to the applicants. Learned A.G.A. further submits that the applicant No.1 has criminal history of three cases.
4. The relevant considerations for grant of anticipatory bail have been duly considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra (2011) 1 SCC 694 which reads as under:
"112.The following factors and parameters can be taken into consideration while dealing with the anticipatory bail:
(i) The nature and gravity of the accusation and the exact role of the accused must be properly comprehended before arrest is made.
(ii) The antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether the accused has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a court in respect of any cognizable offence.
(iii) The possibility of the applicant to flee from justice.
(iv) The possibility of the accused's likelihood to repeat similar or other offences.
(v) Where the accusations have been made only with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by arresting him or her.
(vi) Impact of grant of anticipatory bail particularly in cases of large magnitude affecting a very large number of people.
(vii) The courts must evaluate the entire available material against the accused very carefully. The court must also clearly comprehend the exact role of the accused in the case. The cases in which the accused is implicated with the help of Sections 34 and 149 of the Penal Code, 1860 the court should consider with even greater care and caution because over implication in the cases is a matter of common knowledge and concern.
(viii) While considering the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, a balance has to be struck between two factors, namely, no prejudice should be caused to the free, fair and full investigation and there should be prevention of harassment, humiliation and unjustified detention of the accused.
(ix) The court to consider reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant.
(x) Frivolity in prosecution should always be considered and it is only the element of genuineness that shall have to be considered in the matter of grant of bail and in the event of there being some doubt as to the genuineness of the prosecution, in the normal course of events, the accused is entitled to an order of bail."
5. Looking into the seriousness of the allegations and the complicity of the accused with the said offence as stated in the first information report as well as in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., I do not find it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants. The bail application is accordingly rejected.
Order Date :- 4.2.2021 (Alok Mathur, J.) RKM.