Allahabad High Court
Shyama vs State Of U.P. And Another on 26 July, 2023
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:149470
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8257 of 2023
Applicant :- Shyama
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Puneet Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1. Heard Sri Puneet Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
2. The present application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the applicant for protection in regard to Case Crime No.536 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S.- Kotwali Nagar, District- Banda during the pendency of investigation.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is an innocent lady and she has been falsely implicated in the present case; the applicant is 74 years retarded lady and she has less hearing and vision, copy of the medical report is annexed as Annexure No.6 to the affidavit. He submitted that co-accused Smt. Ramkali and 5 others Vs. State of U.P. and 2 others have been granted anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 13111 of 2022, copy of the same is annexed as Annexure No.5 to the affidavit. He submitted that no money has been transferred in the account of the applicant. He submitted that there are some persons who are imposter of the deceased persons. The applicant has no previous criminal history as has been mentioned in paragraph 13 of the affidavit. He further submitted that applicant has apprehension of imminent arrest and in case, applicant is released on anticipatory bail, she will not misuse the liberty and would co-operate with the trial.
4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant. He has submitted that in view of the seriousness of the allegations made against the applicant, she is not entitled to grant of anticipatory bail. The apprehension of the applicant is not founded on any material on record. Only on the basis of imaginary fear, anticipatory bail cannot be granted.
5. Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicant, he is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
6. In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant- Shyama, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on anticipatory bail 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:-
(i) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation.
(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 her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.
(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
(iv) The applicant shall surrender her passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. Her passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(v) 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.
(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.
(vii) 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 her bail and proceed against her in accordance with law.
7. In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
8. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.7.2023
Krishna*
