Court No. - 87

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438

CR.P.C. No. - 11900 of 2022

Applicant :- Swami Chinmiyanand Saraswati Pupil

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Abhinav Gaur,Ankit Shukla,Chandra Prakash

Pandey,Ramanuj Tiwari,Sr. Advocate

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

1. Heard Sri Anoop Trivedi, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by

Sri Chandra Prakash Pandey, learned counsel for the accused-

applicant as well as S/Sri Manish Goyal and Mahesh Chandra

Chaturvedi, learned Additional Advocate Generals, assisted by

Sri A.K. Sand, learned AGA and Sri Anurag Kumar Pandey,

learned counsel for the complainant.

2. The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been

filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.1423 of 2011,

under Sections 376 and 506 I.P.C. Police Station Kotwali, District

Shahjahanpur.

3. This Court vide fairly long judgement and order dated

19.12.2022 has granted interim protection to the accused-

applicant.

4. On notice, Vakalatnama and counter affidavit have been

tendered today in the Court on behalf of the complainant by Sri

Anurag Kumar Pandey, which are taken on record. The relevant

averments made in the counter affidavit tendered today in the court

on behalf of the complainant would read as under:-

"2. That the deponent is the first antiformant in Case Crime No.1423 of

2011 lodged at Police Station Kotwali, District Shahjahanpur. It is

pertinent to mention here that the deponent had preferred a letter to the

Hon’ble Chief Minster, Government of Utatr Pradesh upon which a

direction was issued and the instant criminal prosecution was lodged.

3. That the Investigating Officer after conclusion of the investigation,

has filed charge sheet under Section 376 and 506 IPC.

4. That the learned Magistrate has proceeded to take cognisance and

summoned the applicant in the present case.

5. That the applicant of the present case proceeded to prefer a criminal

Mic. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before this Hon’ble Court

assailing the summoning and cognizance order taken upon the charge

sheet filed by Investigating Officer of the present case.

6. Tht this Hon’ble Court had granted interim order to the applicant in

the present case and in the meantime, the State Government had taken a

decision for withdrawal of the instant prosecution and thus, the

applicant had withdrawn the above-mentioned criminal misc.

application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

7. That in pursuance of the decision of the State Government for

withdrawal of the instant criminal prosecution, the Public prosecutor

had filed an application under Section 321 of Cr.P.C. for withdrawal of

the case, but the same was rejected by the learned trial court in larger

public interest and secure the ends of the justice.

8. That the deponent has no objection for withdrawal of the instant

criminal prosecution and the deponent, the deponent has no interest in

further prosecuting the aforesaid case.

9. That the deponent has no objection whatsoever if the instant criminal

misc. Anticipatory bail application is allowed and the application is

enlarged on anticipatory bail.”

5. S/Sri Manish Goyal and Mahesh Chndra Chaturvedi, learned

Additional Advocate Generals, assisted by Sri A.K. Sand, learned

AGA have submitted that the State itself has taken a decision to

withdraw from prosecution and has granted permission to the

Public Prosecutor to move an application under Section 321

Cr.P.C. and, therefore, the State is not opposing to grant the

anticipatory bail to the accused-applicant.

6. Considering the stand of the complainant and the State, this

Court finds it appropriate that the interim order dated 19.12.2022

be confirmed and thus, the accused-applicant is admitted on

anticipatory bail. Accused-applicant is directed to appear before

the trial court concerned within one week from today and