Allahabad High Court
Sudha Singh And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 26 May, 2022
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 28
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 788 of 2022
Applicant :- Sudha Singh And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Armendra Pratap Singh,Ram Kumar Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Crime No.234 of 2021, registered under Sections 323, 504, 354 Kha and 509 IPC at Police Station- Vikas Nagar, District Lucknow with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.
As per prosecution story, the informant is said to have gone to her matrimonial house on 20.11.2021 and the applicants along with her father-in-law Sitapati Bagi are stated to have beaten her and torn her clothes also and are said to have levelled objectionable allegations against the informant.
Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the applicants are ladies and applicant no.1 is the sister-in-law and applicant no.2 is her niece. The FIR is delayed by about five days and there is no explanation of the said delay. He has further stated that there is no criminal history of the applicants and the main witness is the informant herself and there is no likelihood of the applicants tampering with the evidence. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicants to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against them. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicants have also been touched upon at length. Learned counsel for the applicants undertake that they will cooperate in the investigation failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.
Per contra, Sri Parshuram Kannaujiya, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Akhilesh Kumar Awasthi, learned AGA have vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants, the applicants are liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and Others vs. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 656". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the accused-applicants Sudha Singh and Kumari Bhavyanshi @ Pankhudi be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
2. that 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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
3. that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
4. that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants;
5. that the investigating officer is directed to conclude the investigation in the present case in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably, within a period of four months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order independently without being prejudiced by any observation made by this court while considering or deciding the present bail application of the applicants;
6. that the applicants are directed to produce certified copy of this order before the SSP/SP concerned within 10 days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of the present order;
7. that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
8. that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
9. that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial or deciding the regular bail application.
Order Date :- 26.5.2022
Ravi Kant
