Allahabad High Court
Km. Rumi Singh vs State Of U.P. And Another on 25 January, 2023
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 77
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 14866 of 2021
Applicant :- Km. Rumi Singh
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Pandey,Devottam Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Devottam Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the record.
The instant application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in light of the apprehension of the arrest of the applicant in Case Crime No. 0055 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station-Chilhiya, District Siddharth Nagar.
Perusal of the record shows that interim protection was granted to the applicant vide order dated 30.11.2021.
On 30.11.2021, the following order was passed:-
"Heard over anticipatory bail application, under Section 438 Cr.P.C., moved by the applicant- Km. Rumi Singh, in Case Crime No.0055 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Chilhiya, District Siddharth Nagar.
Learned counsel for the applicants argued that the accused-applicant is innocent; she has been falsely implicated in above case crime number, whereas her documents were all valid and no forgery or fraud was ever committed by applicant; other co-accused were granted anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate Benches of this Court and orders have been filed at page-25 onward in the paper book, same situation is of applicant; applicant is ready to co-operate with the investigation; there is every likelihood of apprehension of arrest by the police, hence this application for anticipatory bail is with above prayed for.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed.
Having heard and from the very perusal of the First Information Report and considering all those facts and circumstances of the case and law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the Case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC Online SC 98, ground for grant of ad interim anticipatory bail is made out.
Learned A.G.A. is granted two weeks' time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit may also be exchanged.
List this case for final hearing on 20.12.2021.
In the meantime, in case of arrest, the applicant, Km. Rumi Singh, is directed to be enlarged on interim anticipatory bail in above case crime number, on her furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties each of like amount before the Station House Officer of Police Station/Court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required, if investigation is in progress;
(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 such person from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by her before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned/Court concerned;
In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/Government Advocate is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
The Investigating Officer will continue with the investigation, if it is in progress and will not be affected by this order.
A copy of this order shall also be produced before the S.P/S.S.P concerned by the applicants, within a week, if the investigation is still in progress, who shall ensure compliance of this order."
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that charge sheet has been submitted in this matter and the applicant has co-operated in the investigation till submission of charge-sheet. She undertakes to face trial without seeking any unnecessary adjournments. She has never misused the liberty granted by this Court. He further submits that co-accused persons namely Reena Singh, Prabhawati, Jai Prakash, Brij Bhushan, Anshu Singh, Suman Bharti have already been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 24.11.2020, 08.07.2020, 18.02.2020 & 16.07.2021, respectively, by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court.
Learned A.G.A. for the State does not dispute the aforesaid factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of 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 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.
In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed.
Let the accused-applicant Rumi Singh be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime 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 trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. The applicant shall not leave India during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
2. The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.
3. 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
4. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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.
5. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the trial Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1.
6. 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 in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 25.1.2023
Vibha Singh
