Point of Law: Constitution guarantees protection of life and personal liberty of a person and this guarantee is enshrined in Article 21 of Constitution of India.

JUDGMENT :

(Nalin Kumar Srivastava, J.)

1. This application has been moved on behalf of the applicants Sovaran Singh Adhti, Shivanand Shakya, Brijesh Kumar, Santosh, T.R. Shakya @ Tulsidas and Shyam Sundar seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.231 of 2006 (Case No.6183 of 2011) under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 435, 436, 332, 353, 427, 341, 186 IPC, Section 3/4 Public Property Act and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station - Bhogaon, District- Mainpuri.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. From perusal of the FIR it appears that in the case in hand a huge crowd of several persons was raising slogan and the roads were jammed demanding the arrest of some accused wanted in case crime no.226 of 2006 under Section 376 IPC and when the police force came at the spot, several persons including the present accused-applicants, being excited, started stone pelting upon the police force and some persons also opened fire upon the police with intention to kill. Roadways buses, bearing registration nos. UP75-B-9429, UP14-W-9707 and UP84-C-9487 and UP84-C-9171, were damaged and set to fire and public order was completely disturbed. The police with the view to disburse the crowd used force and in defence fire was also reciprocated by the police and some miscreants were arrested on spot. F.I.R. was lodged and investigation started. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed against 64 named accused-persons. Processes were issued by the Court to the accused-persons for appearance including the present accused-applicants, but they did not appear before the Court and the trial Court, in order to procure the appearance of the accused-applicants, issued processes under Sections 82 & 83 Cr.P.C. and they were declared proclaimed offender.

4. The preliminary objection has been raised by the learned State counsel that if the accused-applicants have been declared proclaimed offender, they are not entitled for the benefit to anticipatory bail.

5. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicants are innocent and they have apprehension of their arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against them. Allegations levelled against the applicants are false. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet has been filed and cognizance has been taken by the Court concerned. It has been submitted that in case the applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

6. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

7. In this matter, it reveals that after completion of investigation, charge sheet has been submitted and cognizance has also been taken by the Court concerned. Summons were issued to the accused-applicants. Since the accused-applicants did not appear before the Court concerned, despite service, coercive processes were issued against them as they were absconding. In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the controversy finally by holding the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.

It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial.

It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, th