Allahabad High Court
Priyanka vs State Of U.P. And Another on 4 December, 2023
Author: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:229956
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13328 of 2023
Applicant :- Priyanka
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Manava Nand Chaurasiya,Kranti Kiran Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1. Sri Amit Kumar Srivastava, Advocate has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party no.2 today in the Court, the same is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Kranti Kiran Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
3. This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.0206 of 2023, under Sections 379, 120-B I.P.C., P.S.- George Town, District- Prayagraj.
4. As per prosecution story, it is alleged that Sharanya with her family live in servant quarters of the complainant's house and after build their trust, Sharanya slowly started stealing Gold and Diamond Jewellery from the complainant's house. It is further alleged that Sharanya stolen Rs.5/- lacs with the help of her future husband Ankit and thereafter she bought essential items like Refrigerator, Washing Machine, LED TV, Air Condition, Scooty and kept all items in the house of Ankit's mother Priyanka Devi.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is a 33 years old widow lady, she has been falsely implicated in the present case, she has no concern with the alleged incident. He submitted that the applicant under pressure of her son Ankit, filed a false application before the police concerned on 1.8.2023 and moved frivolous application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 22.9.2023 with the help of Anushka Saroj against the opposite party no.2 and her husband Gaurav Kakkar only to create pressure upon them. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the applicant has seek unconditional apology from the complainants family, wherein, she has stated that she moved the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on the wrong suggestion and she does not want any proceedings against the complainant, copy of the Notarised affidavit is annexed as Annexure No.6 to the affidavit. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant has apprehension of imminent arrest and in case, applicant is released on anticipatory bail, she will not misuse the liberty and would co-operate with the trial.
6. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submitted that the applicant tendered unconditional appology, hence, he has no objection if the Court grant anticipatory bail in favour of the applicant.
7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.
8. Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicant, she is 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 applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
9. In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant- Priyanka, 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:-
(i) The applicant 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.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
(iv) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(v) 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 applicant.
(vi) In case, the applicant misuses 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.
(vii) 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 his in accordance with law.
10. 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 applicant.
11. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands allowed.
Order Date :- 4.12.2023
Krishna*
