Allahabad High Court
Reenu And Another vs State Of U.P. on 26 July, 2023
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:149698
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7682 of 2023
Applicant :- Reenu And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Malik Juned Ahmad
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rakesh Prasad,Utkarsh
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1. Heard Sri Malik Juned Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Rakesh Prasad,Utkarsh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as well as perused the material available on record.
2. This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Criminal Case No.452 of 2020 (State of U.P. Vs. Pankaj and others) arising out of Case Crime No.559 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 307 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 DP Act, P.S.- Atmatddaula, District- Agra during the pendency of investigation.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case; applicant no.1- Reenu is Nanad and applicant no.2-Sanjay is Jeth; the applicants are married and they live separately; the applicants have no concerned with the alleged incident. He submitted that main accused who is husband namely, Pankaj Kumar and Smt. Urmila Devi who is mother-in-law have been granted anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.5690 of 2020 and 6699 of 2023 vide order dated 29.01.2021 and 26.06.2023, copies of the same are annexed as Annexure Nos. 6 & 7 to the affidavit. He further submitted that earlier the applicants, during investigation, have been granted anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.3167 of 2020 vide order dated 10.07.2020, thereafter, charge sheet submitted on 20.10.2020 and thereafter, the applicants approached before the court below for anticipatory bail and the same was rejected by the court below vide its order dated 12.06.2023, hence the present anticipatory bail application. Learned counsel for the applicants further submitted that applicants have apprehension of imminent arrest and in case, applicants are released on anticipatory bail, they he 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 applicants. He has submitted that in view of the seriousness of the allegations made against the applicants, they are not entitled to grant of anticipatory bail. The apprehension of the applicants 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 applicants, they are 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 applicants shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicants- Renu and Sanjay, involved in the aforesaid crime 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:-
(1) The applicants 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.
(2) The applicants 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.
(3) The applicants shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
(4) The applicants shall surrender their passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. Their passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(5) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants.
(6) In case, the applicants 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.
(7) The applicants 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 their bail and proceed against his 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*
