IMPORTANT POINT
Anticipatory bail applications can be granted under changed circumstances, providing protection against wrongful arrest while ensuring cooperation with the investigation.

JUDGMENT :

Mohd.Faiz Alam Khan, J.

Learned A.G.A informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter including complete case diary and the charge sheet has been submitted in this case on 07.12.2021.

2. Heard Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. The present anticipatory bail application has been moved by the accused/applicants-Shahzad @ Mohammad Sajjad and Peena @ Shama Begam in Case Crime No.199 of 2021, under Sections 306, 506 IPC, Police Station Malhipur, District Shrawasti, with the prayer to enlarge her on anticipatory bail as she is apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.

4. Learned counsel for the accused-applicants while pressing the bail application submits that it is a case of false implication. In the FIR which has been lodged by the mother of the deceased various allegations have been levelled against the applicants with regard to the fact that only a day before marriage they refused to solemnize the marriage that daughter of the applicants on the pretext that Rs.one Lakh as agreed were not paid and humiliate the same the deceased (daughter) committed suicide by hanging herself. Postmortem report of the deceased would also reflect that she had died due to asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants has drawn attention of this court towards Annexure No.3, which is copy of an application given by the father of the deceased, namely, Mushtaque Ali on 24.05.2021, wherein it is stated that the deceased was under some kind of depression and in that state of mind she had committed suicide.

6. It is vehemently submitted that this information has been given with utmost promptness and there was no time available to informant party to have manipulated the facts and no allegation of any kind has been levelled in this regard against the applicants or any other accused persons, in that informant however, after many days of written information an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. has been given by the informant and the allegations therein have been aggravated with the help of legal professional.

7. It is further submitted that during the course of investigation the applicants have approached this Court by filing an anticipatory bail application bearing Crl.Misc.Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. No.13759 of 2021 and vide order dated 29.11.2021 interim protection was granted and on 12.10.2022 the said anticipatory bail application was allowed and till submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. liberty of the applicants was protected.

8. It is further submitted that under some bonafide belief the Coordinate Bench could not be informed about the submissions of the charge sheet which in this case has been filed on 7.12.2021 well before the date on which final order was passed in Anticipatory Bail Application No.13759 of 2021.

9. It is vehemently submitted that the applicant have cooperated in the investigation, their liberty was protected during the course of investigation and since they have cooperated in the investigation the Investigating Officer did not find any opportunity or occasion to arrest them and thus their liberty be also protected during the trial.

10. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied on the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and others, 2021(10) SCC 773 and Sushila Aggarwal and Ors. Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and others, MANU/SC/0100/2020.

11. Learned AGA for the State submits that this second Anticipatory Bail Application moved on behalf of the applicants appears to be non-maintainable as the applicants had approached this Court earlier also. It is further submitted that on merits also having regard to the role played by the applicant in commission of crime they are not entitled for any protection.

12. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and havi