Deepak Verma,J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed today, is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. The instant anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicant for enlarging him on bail in Case Crime No. 191 of 2022, under Sections 307, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station- Chandpa, District- Hathras, during pendency of trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Applicant was not named in the first information report and five persons were named in the first information report for assaulting the injured. Injured moved an application alleging therein that applicant was involved in assaulting the injured. He next submitted that applicant had no knowledge regarding his implication in the present case, therefore, he did not appear before the Investigating Officer. In para no. 8 of the supplementary affidavit, it is stated that an application for issuance of process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. was moved and court allowed the same on 12.08.2024. In para no. 11 of the supplementary affidavit, it is stated that first information report under Section 174-A IPC was lodged on 07.10.2024.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that applicant has no criminal history to his credit and has placed reliance over the judgment dated 06.09.2023 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc.Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 1981 of 2023 (Khalid Anwar Alias Anwar Khalid vs. Central Bureau of Investigation Thru. Branch Hear New Delhi). Para nos. 7 and 8 of the same are quoted as under:-
"7. The Court issuing the proclamation has not made any statement in writing as provided in Sub-section (3) of Section 82 Cr.P.C. to the effect that the proclamation was duly published in the manner specified in clause (i) of sub-section (2).
8. When the proclamation has not even been published as per the law, the occasion for the applicant being "declared" a proclaimed offender under Sub-section (4) of Section 82 Cr.P.C has not yet arisen. "
6. Further, he has also placed reliance over the judgment dated 08.01.2024 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 17560 of 2023 (Sumit And Another vs. State of U.P. And 2 Others). Para no. 24 of the same is quoted as under:-
"24. Therefore, if the court itself cannot take cognizance of the offence u/s 174-A I.P.C. on the basis of police report, then lodging the F.I.R. u/s 174-A I.P.C. is futile, and will be against the provision of Section 195(1)(a)(i) Cr.P.C. Therefore, proceedings u/s 174-A I.P.C. can be initiated only on the basis of written complaint of the court which had initiated proceedings u/s 82 Cr.P.c. against the accused and F.I.R. is barred by Section 195(1)(a)(i) Cr.P.C. "
7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application of the applicant and submitted that applicant is not co-operating with the investigation proceedings, therefore, other proceedings have been adopted against him. Further, the judgments on which reliance has been placed by learned counsel for the applicant, are not applicable in the present case.
8. Considered the submissions raised by learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record. From perusal of record, it is apparent that injured had moved an application that applicant was involved in assaulting him and record also disclose that applicant is not co-operating with the investigation proceedings, as such, Investigating Officer has adopted other proceedings in order to arrest the applicant and initiated proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. against the applicant and lodged first information report under Section 174-A IPC. Case in hand is in regard to anticipatory bail and is not for quashing the first information report under Section 174-A IPC, as such, reliance placed upon the Division Bench judgment, is having no effect in the present case. The Hon'ble Apex Court in various judgments has laid down that declared proclaimed offender/absconder under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is not entitled to anticipatory bail. Moreover, injured has named the applicant for assaulting him and conduct of the applicant, non-cooperation in investigation proceedings clearly demonstrate that applicant is willfully not co-operating with the investigation proceedings, as such, no interference is warranted.
9. In view of the aforesaid discussions, I do not find any good ground to grant anticipatory bail applicant in the present case.
10. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stand rejected.
