Allahabad High Court
Devendra Kumar And Another vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 23 March, 2021
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6474 of 2021
Applicant :- Devendra Kumar And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Sharma,Pankaj Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A for the State.
The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants, Devendra Kumar and Smt. Kusma Devi, with a prayer to release them on bail in Complaint Case Crime No. 1933 of 2019, under Sections- 498-A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Hathras Gate, District- Hathras, during pendency of trial.
Applicants have been summoned for facing trial for the offence of demand of dowry and consequent harassment.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated. The marriage of applicant no.1 with opposite party no.3 took place in the year 2017. On account of mis-adjustment in the family, she has filed complaint. The application on behalf of applicant no.1 is rejected and he is directed to obtain bail within 30 days.
Applicant has approached this Court after submission of charge sheet against him relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98 and judgment of this Court in the case of Adil Vs. State of U.P., Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S No.438 Cr.P.C. No. 8285 of 2020. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that from the material collected by the Investigating Officer, no offence is made out against the applicant, hence he is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial.
After considering the material collected by the Investigating officer in support of charge sheet, this Court finds that the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants is not correct. The material collected by the Investigating Officer makes out the offences regarding which the applicants have been charge sheeted.
However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and on the request of learned counsel for the applicants, it is directed that the applicant no.1 will appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail.
Till then, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant no.1.
However, in case, the applicant No.1 does not appears before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.
It is made clear that the applicant no.1 will not be granted any further time by this court for surrendering before the court below as directed above.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of with regard to applicant no.1.
In the event of arrest, the applicant no.2. Smt. Kusma Devi shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant no.2, involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. The applicant no.2 shall not leave the country during the pendency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
2. The applicant no.2 shall surrender her passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. Her passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
3. That the applicant no.2 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;
4. The applicant no.2 shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant.
5. In case, the applicant no.2 misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.
6. The applicant no.2 shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
7. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
8. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 23.3.2021
SS
