Allahabad High Court
Gyan Pal 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. - 9749 of 2020
Applicant :- Gyan Pal Singh
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Shyam Shanker Pandey,I.P. Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Syed Mohammad Abbas Abdy
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
The case is taken in the revised call.
Heard Mr. I.P. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. K.P. Pathak, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.57 of 2020, under Sections 498A, 323, 307, 406, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Mahila Thana, District-Bulandshahr, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.
As per prosecution case, the first informant, namely, Smt. Sapna was married to the son of applicant, namely, Gulab Singh; since after her marriage, her in-laws and her husband kept on demanding money for purchasing a Scorpio car; they put pressure on the first informant and her sister, who was also married in the same family either to bring that money or suffer; the first informant was tortured physically and mentally by applying various tactics; however she kept on bearing the same to save her relations; once she was sprinkled petrol by them to set her ablaze; she was physically assaulted by them and ultimately they refused to keep her and drove her out. An F.I.R. was registered against her husband, her mother-in-law and father-in-law (applicant) and brother-in-law.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is the father-in-law of the informant and he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. He further submits that the applicant has never demanded any dowry nor has mentally or physically tortured the informant for the same. He further submits that after a case under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed by the husband of the informant, the present FIR was lodged to exert pressure upon the applicant and his family members. He further submits that the sister of the informant, namely, Jyoti, who was married to elder son of the applicant, has also lodged an FIR with similar allegations, which goes to show that both sisters for some reason are trying to harass the applicant and his family members. In the FIR, which was lodged by the sister of the informant, anticipatory bail applications have been allowed vide order dated 12.01.2023 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. He further submits that the entire allegations contained in the FIR is absolutely false and vague. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegation made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon length. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he 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.
The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by the learned A.G.A. for the State. However, it is conceded that there is no medical evidence showing any injury on the person of first informant and that as far as section 307 I.P.C. is concerned, no evidence was found for constituting the same during investigation and now charge-sheet has been submitted under sections 498A, 323, 504, 406 I.P.C. and sections- 3/4 D.P. Act only, leaving Section 307 I.P.C.
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 entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case in view of the judgement 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 judgement of the Apex Court.
In view of above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed.
Let the applicant-Gyan Pal Singh involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial 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:-
1.The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.
3. The applicants shall not leave India during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
4. The applicants shall surrender their passports, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. Their passports will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.
5. In case, the applicants 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. 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
7. The applicants 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.
Order Date :- 25.1.2023
Jitendra/-
