The Allahabad High Court has granted anticipatory bail to Kanpur BJP MLA Dr Priya Ranjan Anshu Diwakar.
A Single Bench of Justice Samit Gopal passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc anticipatory bail application filed by Dr Priya Ranjan Anshu Diwakar.
The anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C has been filed by the applicant Dr Priya Ranjan Anshu Diwakar, seeking anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest in Case under Sections 306, 506, 420 and 120-B IPC, Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar.
At the very outset Additional Advocate General of the State raises a preliminary objection that in the anticipatory bail application, the affidavit is of Anamika Verma Ranjan who said the affidavit, has deposed that she is the wife of the applicant and doing pairvi on his behalf which was objected by the stamp reporter of the Court subsequent to which an affidavit dated 12.12.2023 was served in the office of the Government Advocate on 13.12.2023 and filed in the matter in which para no 5 has been pleaded on personal knowledge of the deponent of the said supplementary affidavit who is the applicant himself which reads that defect was reported by the stamp reporter of the High Court with respect to the requirement of filing personal affidavit of the applicant and as such the applicant is deposing personal affidavit by means of supplementary affidavit and also adopting the deposition made in the aforesaid Criminal Misc Anticipatory Bail Application.
He submitted that Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 A (2) of the High Court Rules states an affidavit to be filed by the applicant himself in an anticipatory bail application who is the person apprehending his arrest.
He further submitted that supplementary affidavit this is not proper and the anticipatory bail application be rejected.
The Court said that it is true that High Court Rules state of filing of an affidavit in an anticipatory bail application by the person apprehending arrest which in the anticipatory bail application was objected to by the stamp reporter of the Court since the affidavit in support of anticipatory bail application was not of the applicant and for removing the said defect, a supplementary affidavit was filed by the applicant after which the stamp reporter reported that the defect has been removed through supplementary affidavit although para have to be sworn specifically and independently in an affidavit and there has to be specific verification and swearing of the paragraphs of an affidavit which in the matter is not such.
Since the stamp reporter reports that the defect has been removed and also looking to the fact that the case is an anticipatory bail application where the applicant is apprehending arrest and after the said supplementary affidavit, four other supplementary affidavits being dated 14.12.2023, 17.12.2023, 20.12.2023 and 7.1.2024 have been filed which contain the affidavit of the applicant, the Court ignores the said technical objection and proceeds with the matter.
The Court directed the applicant to file a better affidavit in support of anticipatory bail application with proper swearing of all the paragraphs independently within a period of two weeks failing which the anticipatory bail application shall stand dismissed.
On merits, counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. It is argued that that a FIR was lodged on 10.9.2023 by Smt Bitan Devi against the applicant and five other persons with regards to her husband Babu Singh committing suicide.
It is argued that the facts in the matter are as under:-
(1) A registered agreement to sell was executed on 18.9.2018 by Babu Singh in favour of Raj Kumar Verma, Bablu Yadav and Ashok Kumar Gupta for his land.
(2) On 3.7.2022 Bittan Devi, w/o Babu Singh demanded some money from the said purchasers which was paid to her.
(3) On 18.3.2023 a sale-deed was executed by Babu Singh in favour of Rahul Jain stating to be nominee of said persons in whose favour agreement to sell was executed.
(4) On 30.5.2023 Original Suit (Babu Singh Vs. Rahul Jain, Bablu Yadav) was filed for cancellation of the sale-deed dated 18.3.2023.
(5) On 9.9.2023 at about 5 a.m. the body of Babu Singh was found on the railway track which was run over by a train.
(6) The investigation in the matter is pending and has not yet concluded.
(7) Non bailable warrant was issued against the applicant after which he challenged the same before this Court in a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in which there was an interim order in his favour and then the said non-bailable warrant was recalled by the concerned court after which the said petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was directed to be consigned to records.
(8) Co-accused Rahul Jain and Madhur Pandey have been granted regular bail by the court concerned.
(9) Co-accused Jitendra Yadav has been granted anticipatory bail by another Bench of this Court.
(10) Execution of agreement to sell is of the year 2018 after which Babu Singh committed suicide on 9.9.2023 which is after about five years of the same. Even the sale-deed was executed on 18.3.2023 which is six months prior to the date of occurrence i.e. 9.9.2023.
(11) An alleged suicide note has been recovered which does not in any manner show the complicity of the applicant as there is nothing incriminating in it.
(12) There is no abetment and instigation of any kind by the applicant which has any nexus with the death of the deceased, the applicant has no mens-rea at all, there is no overt act whatsoever of the applicant, which resulted in the death of the deceased. The applicant has no motive at all to commit the aforesaid offence.
Counsel for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and argued as follows:-
(1) A writ petition for quashing of the FIR filed by the applicant was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 9.10.2023.
(2) The C.D.R of the applicant and the deceased show that they were together up-to Lucknow which would show the active involvement of the applicant in abetting the incident.
(3) There is a suicide note which would show the complicity of the applicant.
The Court observed that the matter has arisen out of execution of an agreement to sell, execution of a sale-deed and then filing of a suit for cancellation of the sale-deed by the deceased Babu Singh. Agreement to sell was executed on 18.9.2018 which is around 5 years back to the date of occurrence.
The Court further observed that the matter requires consideration.
The Court granted four weeks time to file counter affidavits and three weeks time to file a rejoinder affidavit.
The Court ordered that,
Till the next date of listing or till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C before the competent Court which ever is earlier, in the event of arrest of the applicant-Dr Priya Ranjan Anshu Diwakar, involved in Case under Sections 306, 506, 420 and 120-B IPC, Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar, he shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii) 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;
(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has a passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P/S.P Concerned.
In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file an appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
The Court has fixed the next hearing of the petition on April 04, 2024.
The post Allahabad High Court grants anticipatory bail to Kanpur BJP MLA Priya Ranjan Anshu Diwakar appeared first on India Legal.