Allahabad High Court
Aarti Jain vs State Of U.P And 3 Others on 8 February, 2023
Bench: Shiv Shanker Prasad
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 85
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13316 of 2022
Applicant :- Aarti Jain
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Karan Pandey,Gaurav Kumar Yadav,Rajrshi Gupta
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant in the Court today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 508 of 2022, under Sections 457, 380, 411 and 120-B I.P.C., Police Station-Badaut, District-Baghpat, during the course of investigation.
As per prosecution story, the informant has suspected that the cash, golds, silver, plates kept in his house have been stolen by neighbour i.e. the accused-Amit @ Happy in his absence with family members.
Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that being the wife of the accused-Amit @ Happy, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. She has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. She has not been named in the first information report nor anything incriminating material has recovered from her possession or her pointing out. Name of the applicant has surfaced in the confessional statement of co-accused Amit @ Happy, which was given before the Police. Such confessional statements have no evidentiary value as per Sections 25 and 26 of the Indian Evidence Act. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that she shall co-operate 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.
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.
On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusation of the applicant, the argument that she has not been named in the first information report nor anything incriminating material has been recovered from her possession or her pointing out, 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), reported in (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.
In view of above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed.
Let the applicant-Aarti Jain involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant shall appear before the trial Court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5. The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;
6. 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
7. 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 him/her/them in accordance with law.
It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the Court below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of applicant in accordance with law.
(Shiv Shanker Prasad, J.)
Order Date :- 8.2.2023
Sushil/-
