The court emphasized the protection of individual liberty under Article 21 and granted anticipatory bail under IPC Section 406, citing Supreme Court guidelines.

JUDGMENT :

Vikram D. Chauhan, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned AGA and perused the material available on record.

2. The present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants-Ravindra Kumar Tripathi and Sandeep Tripathi in Case No. 286 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 115 of 2022, under Section 406 I.P.C., Police Station - Kaushambi, District - Kaushambi.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for applicants that charge sheet has been submitted against applicants under Section 406 I.P.C. which is punishable upto 7 years. He submits that in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2021) 10 SCC 773, the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

4. Learned A.G.A. for the State could not dispute the fact that the offence under Section 406 I.P.C., is punishable upto 7 years. He does not dispute the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supra)

5. The Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2021) 10 SCC 773 has laid down the guidelines with regard to enlargement of an accused on bail. The guidelines provided category/type of offences. Once of the category being Category-A are offences punishable with imprisonment of 7 years or less. The Supreme Court in paragraph-3 of the aforesaid judgment has laid down the guidelines that after the filing of the charge sheet/cognizance ordinary the summons are required to be issued permitting the appearance of the accused through Lawyer and the bail applications of the accused persons on appearance are to be decided without the accused being taken into custody or by granting interim bail. A perusal of the aforesaid guidelines would demonstrate that the liberty of an individual has been recognized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid judgment in term of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

6. It is further to be noted that as per Section 41 of the Code of Criminal Procedure also during investigation the liberty of an individual is protected in respect of an offence where the maximum punishment provided is upto 7 years.

7. It is not the case of the opposite party that applicants were arrested for offence punishable under Sections 406 I.P.C. during investigation and it is also not the case of the opposite party for that the applicants have not co-operated in the investigation. Once no apprehension has been raised with regard to the conduct of the applicants and the applicants have been charge-sheeted and summoned in respect of offence in which punishment provided is upto 7 years, then in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil's (supra), the liberty of the individual is required to be protected.

8. It is not shown by learned AGA that the nature and gravity of allegations are such that the same would disentitle the applicants for relief of anticipatory bail. No material, facts, circumstances or concern been shown by learned AGA for the State that the accused may tamper with the evidence or witnesses or accused is of such character that their mere presence at large would intimidate the witnesses or that accused will use their liberty to subvert justice or tamper with the evidence.

9. Learned counsel for opposite parties has not placed any criminal antecedents of applicants. The applicants have no criminal history.

10. It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicants fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned AGA for the State.

11. In view of above, applicants are granted anticipatory bail in respect of offence described in