IMPORTANT POINT
The court's decision to grant anticipatory bail was influenced by the nature of accusations, the applicant's antecedents, and the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1.

JUDGMENT :

KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

1. List has been revised.

2. Heard Sri Avinash Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 510 of 2013, registered under Sections 363, 366 IPC, P.S. Bhatni, District Deoria, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

4. As per prosecution story, the co-accused Arvind Gupta has enticed away the minor daughter of informant and the first information report was instituted against all the accused persons.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that after thorough investigation, the Investigating Officer was pleased to file closure report qua the applicant. But subsequently during trial the applicant along with other co-accused persons were summoned by the Additional Session Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No. 1, Deoria vide order dated 06.08.2022 by invoking power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel has further stated that the said summoning order is cryptic and without application of judicial mind. The only role of accompanying the main accused Arvind to Bhatni railway station has been assigned to applicant and co-accused Rakesh @ Dimpal. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. There is no criminal history against the applicant. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel has stated that the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.

6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application.

7. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1. The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant/Hasnain be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

(i) that 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 or tamper with the evidence.

(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court.

(iv) that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

(v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

(vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted.

(vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

9. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.