Back
2024 Supreme(UK) 403
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
RAVINDRA MAITHANI, J.
Dr. Shah Fahad and Others - Applicants
Versus
State of Uttarakhand - Respondent
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 184 of 2024
Decided On : 05-03-2024
For the Applicants :Mr. Mohd. Safdar, Advocate
For the Respondent: Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, A.G.A.
IMPORTANT POINT
Anticipatory bail can be granted when there is no formal objection from the State and the applicants have not been arrested during the investigation, provided conditions are imposed to ensure compliance with court orders.
Headnote:
ANTICIPATORY BAIL - CRIMINAL CASE - The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicants under Sections 323, 504, 506, and 498A IPC, emphasizing the lack of formal objections from the State and the applicants' previous interim protection during the investigation. The court interpreted the legal provisions to ensure the applicants' rights were upheld while imposing conditions to prevent witness tampering and ensure compliance with court orders.
Fact of the Case:
The applicants sought anticipatory bail in a case involving allegations of dowry harassment and related offenses after a chargesheet was filed against them following a detailed FIR.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the applicants had not been arrested during the investigation and had previously received interim protection. It concluded that anticipatory bail was warranted.
Issues: Whether the applicants should be granted anticipatory bail given the circumstances of the case and the absence of formal objections from the State.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the absence of arrest during the investigation and the lack of objections from the State justified the granting of anticipatory bail, balancing the rights of the applicants with the need for judicial oversight.
Result: The anticipatory bail application was allowed, subject to conditions regarding witness contact, travel restrictions, and passport surrender.
JUDGMENT :
(Ravindra Maithani, J.)
Applicants Dr. Shah Fahad, Mohd. Aslam,, Nusrat Jahan and Arshad Ali seek anticipatory bail in Criminal Case No.159 of 2021, State Vs. Shah Fahad and Others in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee, District Haridwar, under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 498A IPC (“the case”), which is based on Case Crime No. 678 of 2020, Police Station Kotwali Roorkee, District Haridwar.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. According to the FIR, the victim and the applicant Shah Fahad were married on 15.12.2016, but after marriage, the victim was harassed and tortured for and in connection with the demand of dowry. The FIR was lodged. It is quite in detail. After investigation, chargesheet has been submitted, which is the basis of the case.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that during the pendency of the investigation, the applicants have filed a writ petition, wherein, interim protection was granted to the applicants; they were not arrested. It is argued that post filing of the chargesheet, the applicants had filed a petitioner under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the cognizance order, etc, and the proceedings were stayed, but it could not be extended beyond a limit.
5. Learned State Counsel would submit that no formal objections, as such, is to be filed. She would submit that admittedly the applicants were not arrested during investigation and they have also challenged the cognizance order, etc. in C482 No.802 of 2021.
6. Having considered, this Court is of the view that this is a case, in which the applicants should be granted anticipatory bail. The instant anticipatory bail application deserves to be allowed.
7. The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
8. In the eventuality of arrest, the applicant shall be enlarged on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, each in the like amount, by each one of them, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. In addition to it, the applicants shall also comply with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicants shall not approach any witness in any manner, whatsoever.
(ii) The applicants shall not leave the country without prior permission of the concerned court.
(iii) The applicants shall deposit their passports with the court concerned. The passports may only be returned by the order of the court concerned. In case the applicants do not have passport, they shall give an undertaking to that effect to the court concerned.
(iv) The applicants shall also give an undertaking on (i) & (ii) above.
