In the case given herein under, two issues were raised before the Hon’ble High Court which was as such that:
Held: In this case, accused person was charged for committing fraud and he was granted anticipatory bail by the Hon’ble High Court after taking into consideration the aforesaid issues deciding in affirmative.
IN THE COURT OF HON’BLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT, LUCKNOW BENCH
BAIL No. – 3096 of 2020 [Jawahar Lal @ Jawahar Lal Jalaj(Anticipatory Bail) v. Union Of India Thru. C.B.I./A.C.B./Lucknow]
“Hon’ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Pranjal Krishna, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Qazi Ibrahim, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri S.B. Pandey, learned Senior Advocate and Assistant Solicitor General of India.
On 16.6.2020 this Court has passed following order:
“Heard Sri Pranjal Krishna, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri S.B. Pandey, learned Senior Advocate and Assistant Solicitor General of India assisted by Sri Qazim Ibrahim, Advocate for the opposite party. This Court vide order dated 03.06.2020 granted a week’s time to file counter affidavit, but no counter affidavit has been filed.
Sri S.B. Pandey, learned Senior Advocate has submitted that he may be given shortest time to file counter affidavit or to file objection against interim relief application.
In the given circumstances, if he is not able to file counter affidavit/ objection, he may file written submission along with the relevant case laws to assist the Court within 48 hours. Sri Pranjal Krishna, learned counsel for the applicant prays for and is granted 48 hours time to file an order of this Court by which the present applicant was lastly protected. He may also file written submission supporting with the relevant case laws, particularly, on the point that interim relief may be granted or anticipatory bail may be granted in a case where the applicant has approached this Court time and again at different stages and given interim protection.
For the reasons, Sri S.B. Pandey, learned Senior Advocate has submitted that in view of the facts and circumstances of this case particularly the protections are being granted by this Court time and again, the applicant should approach the learned trial court for regular bail and he may take all pleas and grounds which are available with him.
Both the aforesaid rival submissions shall be considered on the next date and on the basis of instructions the application may be disposed of if the appropriate assistance is given by the learned counsel for the parties.
List/ put up this case on 18.06.2020 as fresh in the additional cause list.”
Today Mr. Pranjal Krishna has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in re: Kamlesh and another vs. State of Rajasthan and another in Criminal Appeal No. 1006 of 2019 which was decided by Hon. Apex Court on 9.7.2019 granting anticipatory bail to the appellants who were before the Hon’ble Apex Court even their objection under section 482 Cr.P.C. has already been rejected by the High Court. Therefore, as per Sri Pranjal Krishna the objection so raised by the learned counsel for the opposite party that earlier some remedies have been availed by the applicant before this Court, therefore, the anticipatory bail may not be granted, is not tenable.
Sri Pranjal Krishna has also drawn attention of this Court towards another order of Hon’ble Apex Court in re: Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth vs. State of Gujarat and Ors. reported in Manu/SC/0949/2015 wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has granted anticipatory bail to the appellant in the issue which was 17 years old and relevant section of that issue is 376. Besides Sri Pranjal Krishna has drawn attention of this Court towards the dictum of Hon’ble Apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and Ors. vs. State of Punjab reported in AIR 1980 SC 1632), Bharat Chaudhary and Ors. vs. State of Bihar and Ors. reported in AIR 2003 SC 4662) and Sushila Aggarwal and Ors. vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and Ors. in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) Nos. 7281- 7282/2017) by submitting that this Hon’ble Court has got extraordinary power to grant anticipatory bail if this Court finds a fit case for granting anticipatory bail.
The brief facts of the case is that the present applicant was serving on the post of Assistant Post Master at Post Office Banda and the allegation against him was that he has sanctioned the first payment of Rs. 40,000/- from a recurring deposit account. However, the second payment was made by Sri S.G. Tripathi and in that payment there was no connivance of the present applicant. He has also submitted that the present applicant is senior citizen and retired person and he shall not evade the trial proceeding and shall cooperate with the trial. He shall not leave the country without the prior permission of the Court /competent authority.
Learned counsel for the opposite party has however, not filed any objection nor placed any case law opposing anticipatory bail application, has submitted that since the applicant has already availed some remedies from this Court time to time, therefore, he should have surrendered before the Court concerned to face the trial strictly in accordance with law.
It is, therefore, directed that the applicant shall definitely cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall not evade such proceedings in any manner whatsoever. Since he is a retired government employee having his permanent address at Shankar Nagar, Banda, therefore, prima facie there is no likelihood of evading trial proceedings. As per Sri Pranjal Krishna being an old aged person he is having old age induced ailments and in given circumstances of COVID-19 if the applicant is kept in jail he may be infected from any such disease being a vulnerable person.
Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the issue in question and without entering into the merits of the issue, I hereby direct that in the event of arrest, the accused applicant Jawahar Lal @ Jawahal Lal Jalaj, involved in Criminal Case No. 280 of 2015 (State vs. Jawahar Lal) arising out of Crime No. R.C. 0062009A0023 of P.S. -C.B.I /A.C.B./ Lucknow under sections 120B read with 409, 468, 471,477A & 201IPC and sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(c)&(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 pending in the Court of Special Judge, C.B.I., Court no. 6, Lucknow shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii) That 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;
(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court.
(iv) such other condition as may be imposed under subsection
(3) of Section 437, as if the bail were granted
under that section. Let a detailed counter affidavit be filed within three weeks, rejoinder affidavit may be filed within one week. List this case in the week commencing 20.7.2020, if possible within top ten cases.
Order Date :- 19.6.2020″
NOTE: Readers can get the copy of the aforementioned order from http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/StartWebSearch.do