Uma Datt Shukla Anticipatory Bail vs State Of U.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 626 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 12
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7518 of 2020
 

 
Applicant :- Uma Datt Shukla Anticipatory Bail
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Suresh Kumar Upadhyay
 

 
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State/respondent as well as perused the record.

This Court vide order dated 2.11.2020 granted interim protection to the applicant. It has been informed by learned A.G.A. that charge-sheet has been filed.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not misused the protection granted by this Court. The applicant has no previous criminal history. The applicant is 75 years old. The admitted case of the prosecution is that no dangerous weapons or means were used for assault. No specific role has been assigned to any of the accused persons.

Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the trial and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application, however, could not dispute the fact that no dangerous weapon was used in the incident.

On due consideration to the arguments advanced, perusal of the record, prima facie it appears that the applicant is 75 years old, had not misused the liberty earlier granted by this Court, has no criminal antecedent. The story in the First Information Report that farsa was used and by that injuries were caused is not corroborated by the medical report whereupon no injuries by sharp edged weapon have been found. Accordingly, this court is of the opinion that it would be expedient in the interest of justice that the liberty of the applicant may be protected in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.

In view of the above as also keeping in view of the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC OnLine 98, the interim order dated 2.11.2020 is affirmed. However, the accused applicant is directed to surrender before trial court if he is summoned to face trial for offence in question after filing of the charge sheet. The accused applicant shall be released on bail by the trial court on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court with the following conditions:-

(i) 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or tamper with the evidence;

(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

(iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;

Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed.

It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed.

Order Date :- 6.1.2023

Madhu