Point of Law: Bail can be granted to an accused till the conclusion of trial and therefore applicants' prayer can be considered for grant of anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri S.I. Jafri, learned counsels for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State.

2. The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant an anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Adil, Case Crime No. 89 of 2019, under Sections-307 and 504 IPC, Police Station-Civil Lines, District- Aligarh.

3. 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.

4. This anticipatory bail application has been filed praying for enlargement of the applicant on anticipatory bail again when earlier he was granted anticipatory bail by this court vide Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 29238 of 2019 till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the Investigating Officer has submitted charge sheet against the applicant and the co-accused under Section 307/504 IPC before CJM, Aligarh and after cognizance of the same the applicant alongwith co-accused have been summoned by the court vide order dated 02.11.2019. Hence the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial.

5. Learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer made on behalf of the applicant and has submitted that once anticipatory bail was granted to the applicant for a limited period and he availed the same, there is no occasion for granting him further anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial. Since the charge sheet has been submitted and cognizance has been taken thereof by the C.J.M., hence the applicant may apply for regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C or he may challenge the charge sheet and summoning order passed by the C.J.M., concerned.

6. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has relied upon the judgment of the Patna High Court in the case of Anirudh Prasad @ Sadhu Yadav vs. The State of Bihar dated 22, May, 2006 wherein the Patna High Court had earlier granted anticipatory bail to the applicant till the submission of police report. Later when the charge sheet was filed against him he moved second anticipatory bail application for granting him anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial. The prayer was turned down by Patna High Court but the Apex Court did not agreed to the same and directed the Patna High Court to consider the bail application of the applicant afresh. The Patna High Court found that the power to grant anticipatory bail does not comes to an end by mere submission of charge sheet against the applicant. After considering the merits of the case anticipatory bail was granted to the applicant by the Patna High Court till the conclusion of trial.

7. Next reliance has been placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Chaudhary & Another vs. State of Bihar & Another (2005) 8 SCC 77 dated 08.10.2003 wherein the Apex Court held that there is no restriction on the power of the courts empowered to grant anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C to prevent undue harassment of accused persons by pre-trial arrest and detention. It can be granted even when cognizance on charge sheet has been taken.

8. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has further relied upon the judgment of Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Imratlal Vishwakarma and Others vs. State of Madhya Pradesh dated 09.12.1996, 1996(0) MPLJ 662 and the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Ravindra Saxena vs. State of Rajasthan (2010) 1 SCC 684 dated 15.12.2009 where the second anticipatory bail application of the applica