Allahabad High Court
Shivani vs State Of U.P. on 19 December, 2022
Bench: Suresh Kumar Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12522 of 2022
Applicant :- Shivani
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Harshit Pathak,Anurag Pathak
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
By means of the supplementary affidavit personal affidavit is filed today in Court is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Pankaj Kumar Tripathi, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
The present anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail as the accused-applicant is apprehending her arrest in connection with Case Crime No. 140 of 2022, under Section 306, 323 and 504 IPC, Police Station- Chilkana, District Saharanpur.
It is contended on behalf of the applicant that she is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is the wife of the deceased. The deceased committed suicide due to known reason by consuming poison. There is no allegation against the applicant to instigate the deceased to commit suicide. It is further submitted that the deceased was a person of bad temper and had consumed some noxious material out of his own will. Learned counsel for applicant has placed reliance upon the statement of Dr. Ashad wherein he has stated that he was told by the sister of the deceased that he has consumed some noxious substance and had gone from his clinic hale and hearty. The deceased did not disclosed the reason of consuming poison substance. Further submission is that the applicant is cooperating with the investigation. Hence, the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail and she is ready to cooperate with the trial. If the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, she will never misuse the same. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on a judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.
In the instant case, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.
In the event of arrest the applicant (Shivani) shall be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in the aforesaid case crime for the aforesaid offences on his furnishing a personal bond and 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 their passports, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. Her 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 she 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 applicants.
5. In case, the applicant misuse 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 and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1.
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 their bail and proceed against them in accordance with law.
The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
Order Date :- 19.12.2022
Virendra
