Allahabad High Court
Poonam Jain vs State Of U.P. 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. - 15386 of 2021
Applicant :- Poonam Jain
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sadaful Islam Jafri,Nasira Adil,Nazrul Islam Jafri(Senior Adv.)
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Chandrakesh Mishra,Katyayini
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Sadrul Islam Jafri, learned counsel appearing for the applicant, Ms. Katyayini, learned Advocate who has put in appearance on behalf of the informant and Sri Amit Singh Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State, and perused the record.
The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 55 of 2020, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506, 120-B IPC, Police Station-Kavi Nagar, District-Ghaziabad, with a prayer to enlarge her on anticipatory bail.
On 11.11.2021, the following order was passed:-
"On the request made by Sri D.S. Mishra, learned Senior Advocate for the informant, put up this matter again on 22nd November, 2021.
Till the next date of listing no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in pursuance of Case Crime No. 55 of 2020 under Sections- 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 and 120-B IPC, P.S. Kavi Nagar, District- Ghaziabad."
Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the applicant submits that during the course of investigation the applicant was released on anticipatory bail by the court below. He next submits the applicant has been abiding by the conditions imposed while granting anticipatory bail and never violated any of the conditions thereof. After submission of chargesheet the present anticipatory bail application was filed before this Court after approaching the court below. Learned Senior Counsel further submits that in the present case on 11.11.2021 interim protection was granted by this Court to the effect that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner, which is still in operation till date. To strengthen bonafide approach of the applicant, he submits that the applicant is ready to face trial without seeking any unnecessary delay and will cooperate without any fail at her end.
Ms. Katyayini, learned counsel appearing for the informant also expresses consent submitting that the informant also beseeches to get the trial expedited as proceedings of trial are lying withheld before the trial court due to interim protection granted by this Court on 11.11.2021. She further submits that some time period may be framed for conclusion of trial.
Learned A.G.A. opposes the anticipatory bail application stating that the dispute is in regard to some property transaction between the applicant and informant.
Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, nature of the dispute, joint request of both parties to get the trial decided expeditiously with the undertaking on behalf of the applicant that no unnecessary adjournment will be sought and she will render her cooperation in early disposal of trial, this Court finds it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant 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 ? Poonam Jain be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. One Lakh 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 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.
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 her in accordance with law.
The trial court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of one year from the date a certified copy of this order is placed before it.
Order Date :- 25.1.2023
DS
