Allahabad High Court
Sapana Devi And Another vs State Of U.P. on 1 August, 2019
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 44
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30267 of 2019
Applicant :- Sapana Devi And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Prakash Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Sri C.S.Pandey, Advocate, has filed his Vakalatnama along with compromise application today in Court, which is taken on record.
Heard Sri S.P.Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri C.S.Pandey, learned counsel for the complainant, Sri G.P.Singh, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are the mother-in-law and devar of the victim respectively and have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that the victim suffered the acid burn injuries on account of accidental fall of acid from an almirah in a room. The applicant no.1 who is mother in-law of the victim had taken her to the hospital after the incident The matter has been compromised between the parties and the complainant does not want to proceed further with the present case against the applicants.
Learned counsel for the complainant has admitted the fact of compromise and submitted that there is specific allegation against the applicant no.2.
So far as applicant no.1 is concerned, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the nature of accusation and the fact that she has no criminal antecedents, she is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.
In the event of arrest of the applicant--Sapna Devi involved in Case Crime No.65 of 2019, under Section 326A, 323 I.P.C., Police Station Gopiganj, District Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi), she shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- 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 herself available for interrogation by a police office 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 office;
(iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if she has passport the same shall be deposited by her before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.
In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order independently without being prejudice by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.
The applicant is directed to produce a certified copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.
So far as applicant no.2 is concerned, taking into account the nature of injuries which is 8% burn injuries and there is specific allegation against him, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the submission advanced, the nature and gravity of the accusation, I find no good ground for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant no.2-Satish Kumar Mishra @ Shyamu involved in Case Crime No.65 of 2019, under Section 326A, 323 I.P.C., Police Station Gopiganj, District Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi).
Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected.
However, the applicant No.2 is at liberty to move bail application u/s 439 Cr.P.C., if so advised.
Order Date :- 1.8.2019/NS
