The discretion for granting anticipatory bail should be exercised with care and circumspection, and the nature and gravity of the accusation, the antecedents of the applicant, and the possibility of fleeing from justice should be considered.

JUDGMENT

Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)--The present bail application has been filed under section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR bearing No. 0007/2022 registered under section 3 Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966 at P.S. RPF, Tughlakabad.

2. Vide order of this Court dated 09.11.2022 the petitioner was directed to join the investigation at PS RPF, Tughlakabad on 10.11.2022 at 10:00 AM and on subsequent dates as and when directed by the concerned IO. Further, Status Report was directed to be filed. The Status Report has been placed on record. As per the Status Report the petitioner namely Shahid Hussain has joined the investigation, however, he has not given any satisfactory reply regarding the recovery of the case property and is not cooperating during the investigation. The IO submits that even though the petitioner has joined the investigation he is not cooperating and further states that the case property is yet to be recovered.

3. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his client readily joined the investigation and has always been cooperating in the investigation. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner would adhere to all the conditions as imposed by this Court and shall appear before the IO as and when directed. Learned counsel further submits that the other co-accused namely Akil Ahmad, Mohd. Ibrahim, Mohd. Wajid, Rajbir s/o Babu Lal, Mohd. Gulfam, Rajbir @ Raju s/o Sh. Prakash, Arjun Singh, Mohd. Dilshad have already been released on bail by the learned Trial court.

4. It has been submitted that apprehending his arrest, the petitioner moved the learned Sessions Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail which was dismissed by the Learned ASJ-03, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi vide order dated 10.10.2022. Thereafter, second application for anticipatory bail was moved by the petitioner, which too, was dismissed by the Learned ASJ-03, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, vide order dated 28.10.2022. Aggrieved thus the petitioner has moved this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail.

5. The IO submits that recovery of articles for an amount of Rs.14,000/- is yet to be recovered from the petitioner.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that to show bona fide, the petitioner would furnish a FDR for an amount of Rs.15,000/- before the learned Trial Court within 7 days without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the petitioner.

7. In Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs State of Punjab, AIR 1980 SC 1632, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court discussed certain considerations to be born in mind for grant of anticipatory bail. Some of which include the following:

a. The applicant must show that he has "reason to believe" that he may be arrested for a non-bailable offence. "Reason to believe" must be founded on reasonable grounds and mere `fear' and vague apprehension for arrest is not enough. Section 438(1) Cr.P.C. cannot be invoked on the basis of vague and general allegations, as if to arm oneself in perpetuity against a possible arrest.

b. Upon an application being moved for anticipatory bail, the High Court or the Court of Session must apply its own mind to the question and decide whether a case has been made out for granting such relief.

c. Filing of a FIR is not a condition precedent to the exercise of the power conferred under Section 438. The imminence of a likely arrest founded on a reasonable belief can be shown to exist even if an FIR is not yet filed. Anticipatory bail can be granted even after an FIR is filed, so long as the applicant has not been arrested. The provisions of Section 438 Cr. P.C. cannot be invoked after the arrest of the accused.

d. A `blanket order' of anticipatory bail should not generally be passed.

8. In Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, (2011) 1 SCC 694; the Supreme Court relying upon the Constitution Bench judgment in Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia (supra) laid down the following f