Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Shahnawaz @ Sanu vs State Of U.P. And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|05 April, 2021

JUDGMENT / ORDER

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant - Shahnawaz @ Sanu, seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 0034 of 2020, under Sections - 147, 148, 149, 307, 336, 427, 332, 353, 436 I.P.C. and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station -Kotwali Nagar, District - Aligarh, during the pendency of trial.
3. The applicant had earlier approached this Court by means of Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.5068 of 2020, it was disposed of vide order dated 19.10.2020 on the following terms:-
"1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant -Babar Quraishi, seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.34 of 2020, under Sections -147, 148, 149, 307, 336, 427, 332, 353, 436 I.P.C. and Section 7 C.L.A. Act, Police Station -Kotwali, District -Aligarh, during the pendency of trial.
3. While the bail application has been opposed by the State by submitting that the applicant being named in the FIR, it remains undisputed that other named accused persons against whom similar allegations have been made have approached this Court under Article 226 by means of Criminal Misc. Writ Petition Nos.7407 of 2020, 5794 of 2020, 5882 of 2020, 5975 of 2020 and 4505 of 2020 wherein while disposing of their petition, this Court has provided that though the investigation may proceed, however those persons may not arrested till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.
4. In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the present application pending or calling for objections at this stage. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled to be released on interim anticipatory bail in this case, at this stage.
5. In the event of arrest of the applicant - Babar Quraishi involved in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned on the following conditions:
(i) The applicant shall make him 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 officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court.
(iv) In default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officers shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
6. Accordingly, the present application is disposed of."
4. The applicant has thus remained protected till now. At present, chargesheet has been submitted. In Sushila Aggarwal vs State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020) 5 SCC 1, it has been observed as under:-
"77.3. In these circumstances, the mere fact that an accused is given relief underSection 438at one stage, per se does not mean that upon the filing of a charge-sheet, he is necessarily to surrender or/and apply for regular bail. The analogy to ?deemed bail? underSection 167(2)with anticipatory bail leads this court to conclude that the mere subsequent event of the filing of a charge-sheet cannotcompel the accused to surrender and seek regular bail. As a matter of fact, interestingly, if indeed, if a charge-sheet is filed where the accused is on anticipatory bail, the normal implication would be that there was no occasion for the investigating agency or the police to require his custody, because there would have been nothing in his behavior requiring such a step. In other words, an accused, who is granted anticipatory bail would continue to be at liberty when the charge sheet is filed, the natural implication is that there is no occasion for a direction by the Court that he be arrested and further that he had cooperated with the investigation."
(emphasis supplied)
5. Further, it has been observed:
(91.2) As regards the second question referred to this court, it is held that the life or duration of an anticipatory bail order does not end normally at the time and stage when the accused is summoned by the court, or when charges are framed, but can continue till the end of the trial. Again, if there are any special or peculiar features necessitating the court to limit the tenure of anticipatory bail, it is open for it to do so."
(emphasis supplied)
6. In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the present application pending or calling for counter affidavit at this stage. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail in this case, at this stage.
7. In the event of arrest of the applicant - Shahnawaz @ Sanu, involved in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of the trial, on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned on the 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/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court.
(iv) In default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
8. Present application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 5.4.2021 S.Chaurasia
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Shahnawaz @ Sanu vs State Of U.P. And Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
05 April, 2021
Judges
  • Saumitra Dayal Singh