Allahabad High Court
Smt. Sharda vs State Of U.P.And Another on 24 August, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:171347
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8345 of 2023
Applicant :- Smt. Sharda
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Singh Dahiya,Anshul Pathak,Purnendu Bajpai
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manu Sharma,Rafiqa Anees Khan
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Rahul Singh Dahiya, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manu Sharma, learned counsel for the informant and Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Complaint Case No. 1148 of 2020, registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C. at Police Station- Hapur Nagar, District- Hapur with a prayer to enlarge her on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant in collusion with other co-accused persons is stated to have transferred the land of the informant fraudulently, who was minor at that time. The FIR was instituted on 27.6.2016 and after investigation the closure report was filed. The informant filed a protest petition and vide order dated 8.12.2017 of the C.J.M., Hapur the case was treated as complaint case and the applicant was summoned vide order dated 4.11.2020.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The present case is misuse of process of the court. The applicant has cooperated during investigation and is being harassed by the present complaint case. The summoning order is cryptic one without application of mind. The criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant stands explained as the applicant has been acquitted in it. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against her. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The applicant has apprehension of her arrest Learned counsel has stated that the applicant undertakes that she has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.
7. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Smt. Sharda be released forthwith in the aforesaid complaint case (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i). that the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii). 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 her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
9. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.
Order Date :- 24.8.2023/Vikas
[Krishan Pahal, J.]
