Allahabad High Court
Seema vs State Of U.P. on 27 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. - 7673 of 2020
Applicant :- Seema
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Neeraj Kumar Srivastava,Pankaj Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
List has been revised.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 206 of 2020, under Section 307, 332, 353, 342, 186, 336, 224, 225, 504 IPC, Police Station-Aurai, District-Bhadohi(Gyanpur), with a prayer to enlarge her on anticipatory bail.
On 11.11.2020, following order was passed:-
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant - Seema, seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 206 of 2020, under Sections - 307, 332, 353, 342, 186, 336, 224, 225, 504 I.P.C., Police Station - Aurai, District - Bhadohi (Gyanpur), during pendency of trial.
3. At the outset, it is stated by learned counsel for applicant that the co-accused Kailash has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.7047 of 2020 vide order dated 22.10.2020.
4. Connect and list this case in the week commencing 11.01.2021 along with Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.7047 of 2020, in the additional cause list before the appropriate Bench. By the said date, counter affidavit be filed by learned A.G.A.
5. At present, there are no criminal antecedents of the applicant shown as also no real apprehension has been expressed by the State of the applicant fleeing from justice, if the present application is allowed.
6. Thus, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled to interim anticipatory bail in this case, at this stage.
7. In the event of arrest of the applicant - Seema, involved in the aforesaid case crime, she shall be released on interim anticipatory bail during the investigation, till the next date fixed, on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned on the following conditions:
(i) The applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.
(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 him/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court.
(iv) In default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant."
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and she has an apprehension that she may be arrested in the abovementioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against her. The applicant has always co-operated in the investigation till submission of charge-sheet on 12.12.2020 and has not misused the liberty of aforesaid interim protection, which was granted to her on 11.11.2020 by coordinate Bench of this Court, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. 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 she has cooperated 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 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-Smt. Seema 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 :- 27.1.2023
S. Singh
