Km Babita vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 438 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 67
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2107 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Km Babita
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Danish
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohd. Ishraque Farooqui
 

 
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

Heard Sri Mohammad Danish, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mohd. Ishraque Farooqui, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned (Brief Holder) appearing for the State and perused the record.

It is contended on behalf of the applicant that she is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Civil suit is already pending between the parties. She did not commit any offence as alleged. It is further submitted that she has been implicated in the present due to ulterior motive. The applicant has no criminal antecedent.

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the nature of accusation and the fact that he has no criminal antecedent, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

Let the applicant- Km Babita involved in Complaint Case No. 6346 of 2021 under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 452, 380 I.P.C., Police Station- Majhola, District- Moradabad, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

1. The applicant shall not leave India during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

2. The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.

3. That 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

4. The applicant 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 misuses the liberty of bail, the trial 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 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.

Order Date :- 4.4.2022

A.P. Pandey