1. Heard Shri Atul Verma, learned counsel for the applicant learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.
2. The instant application has been moved by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 466 of 2020, under Sections 354-kha, 386, 394, 504, 452, 506 I.P.C., relating to Police Station - Madion, District - Lucknow.
3. Counter affidavit, filed on behalf of State of U.P. is available on record.
4. This Court by means of detailed order dated 23.11.2020, has granted interim protection to the applicant.
5. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is a news reporter and he had gone to conduct sting operation in Mayawati Colony of Police Station - Madiaon, District - Lucknow. As the Police men were not happy with the said action of the applicant, they lodged first information report against the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant has given details of sting operation by way of CUG number to the Incharge of the concerned police personnel by way of CD. The applicant is innocent, he has no criminal history and due to the aforesaid reasons present false and frivolous FIR has been lodged against him.
6. Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by learned counsel for the applicant.
7. After considering the rival submissions this court finds that there is a case registered/about to be registered against the applicant. It cannot be definitely said when the police may apprehend him. After the lodging of FIR the arrest can be made by the police at will. There is no definite period fixed for the police to arrest an accused against whom an FIR has been lodged. The courts have repeatedly held that arrest should be the last option for the police and it should be restricted to those exceptional cases where arresting the accused is imperative or his custodial interrogation is required. Irrational and indiscriminate arrests are gross violation of human rights. In the case of Joginder Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1994 SC 1349, the Apex Court has referred to the third report of National Police Commission wherein it is mentioned that arrests by the police in India is one of the chief source of corruption in the police. Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental rights and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative. According to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the peculiar case the arrest of an accused should be made.
8. Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicant, the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
9. The Court has considered the rival submissions and looking into the circumstances as well as annexures which have been annexed with the application for anticipatory bail as well as counter and rejoinder affidavits, this Court finds it a fit case to allow the present anticipatory bail application.
10.The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
11. This Court directs that in the event of arrest, the accused-applicant Umesh Lodhi, involved in Case Crime No. 466 of 2020, under Sections 354-kha, 386, 394, 504, 452, 506 I.P.C., relating to Police Station - Madion, District - Lucknow, shall be released forthwith on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting officer/Investigating Officer/ S.H.O. concerned on the following conditions:-
(i) That the accused-applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by police authorities as and when required and will cooperate with the investigation;
(ii). That the accused-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; and
(iii). That the accused-applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.
12.The papers regarding bail submitted to the police officer on behalf of the accused/applicant shall form part of the case diary and would be submitted to the court concerned along with same at the time of submission of report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.
13.In case there is breach of any of the above conditions or in case it is otherwise found for any other reason the bail is required to be cancelled, it shall be open for the State or the appropriate authority to move application for cancellation of bail in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 4.2.2021 A. Verma (Alok Mathur, J.)