Allahabad High Court
Rubi 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. - 19420 of 2021
Applicant :- Rubi 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-Bhawaniganj, District Siddharth Nagar.
Perusal of the record shows that interim protection was granted to the applicant vide order dated 09.02.2022.
On 09.02.2022, the following order was passed:-
"Learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State are present.
Learned A.G.A. seeks time to file counter affidavit.
It is directed that no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant Rubi Singh in case crime no.0057 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, police station Bhawaniganj, district Siddharth Nagar till the next date fixed in the matter.
Put up on 3.03.2022 as fresh. "
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 Rubi 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
