Allahabad High Court
Bhoori @ Gulsin And 2 Others vs State Of U.P And Another on 25 May, 2022
Bench: Neeraj Tiwari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2085 of 2022
Applicant :- Bhoori @ Gulsin And 2 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Sufia Saba,Sayeed Saif Ullah
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjay Kumar Yadav
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and Sri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2-informant.
This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 3765 of 2021, under sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 427, 452, 436, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Mandi, District- Saharanpur, during the pendency of investigation.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants are ladies and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to previous enmity. He further submits that an incident took place for which, an F.I.R. was lodged by real brother of applicants, upon which, informant was arrested. After release on bail, a complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. dated 04.12.2015 has been filed for the alleged incident of 09.07.2015 against all the family members i.e. three female members and three male members. He next submits that general role has been assigned to the female members (applicants) whereas specific role has been assigned to three male members. He next submits that co-accused Salik, Talib and Kaleem, who have been assigned specific role, have been granted regular bail by the court below, therefore, applicants may also be released on anticipatory bail. The applicants have no criminal history.
Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the facts so argued by learned counsel for the applicants about criminal history of applicants, general role to the applicants and specific role to three other co-accused (male members) and enlargement of three co-accused on bail.
Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicants, they are directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
In the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicants Bhoori @ Gulsin, Gulsita and Smt. Rubina involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
(1) The applicants shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation;
(2) The applicants 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; and
(3) The applicants shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
(4) The applicants shall surrender their passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. Their passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(5) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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.
(6) In case, the applicants misuse 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.
(7) The applicants 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.
In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.
With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 25.5.2022
Rmk.
