Court No. - 75
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 19314 of 2021
Applicant :- Shyamu Sharma @ Shyamau @ Kalla And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Gupta,Rajendra Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Raj Kumar Srivastava,Santosh Kumar
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard over anticipatory bail application, under Section 438 Cr.P.C., moved by the applicant- Shyamu Sharma @ Shyamau @ Kalla and Dinesh Sharma @ Dinesh, in Case Crime No. 46 of 2021, under Section 306 IPC, Police Station- Basai Arela, District- Agra.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused- applicants are innocent; they have been falsely implicated in this very case crime number; deceased had committed suicide owing to her depression and this was said to be in affidavit by informant and other witnesses, given to police concerned, the same is part of case diary also; there is every likelihood of arrest of applicant; an application was moved before the Court of Session Judge, where it was rejected summarily, hence this anticipatory bail application with above prayer.
Prior notice of this bail application was served in the office of Government Advocate and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P., hence, this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned A.G.A as per Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. (U.P. Amendment) is not required.
Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed, but could not oppose the fact that the affidavit, which is part of case diary, is of this fact that this was a false implication and it was by informant and other witnesses.
Having heard and gone through material placed on record as well as considering the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the Case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC Online SC 98, but without commenting on the merit of case, ground for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.
In case of arrest, the applicant, Shyamu Sharma @ Shyamau @ Kalla and Dinesh Sharma @ Dinesh, is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in above case crime number, till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. before the competent court on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties each of like amount to the satisfaction of Station House Officer of police station/ court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required, if investigation is in progress;
(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 such person from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned/Court concerned;
In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/Government Advocate is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
The Investigating Officer will continue with the investigation, if it is in progress and will not be affected by this order.
A copy of this order shall also be produced before the S.P/S.S.P concerned by the applicant, within a week, if the investigation is still in progress, who shall ensure compliance of this order.
This anticipatory bail application is finally disposed off.
Order Date :- 22.12.2021 Kamarjahan