Allahabad High Court
Smt . Hazara vs State Of U.P. on 23 March, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1462 of 2023
Applicant :- Smt . Hazara
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Indresh Chandra,Awadhesh Kumar Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Heard Sri Awadhesh Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.K.S. Parmar, 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.580 of 2021, Criminal Case No.14026 of 2021, registered under Section 406 I.P.C. at Police Station- Izzatnagar, District Bareilly with a prayer to enlarge her on anticipatory bail.
As per prosecution story, the applicant and the informant along with some other persons had taken a Committee, whereby the applicant was supposed to provide an amount of Rs.12 lakhs to the informant. When the informant had gone to the house of the applicant on 14.6.2021 at about 7-8 p.m. the son of the applicant Jubair and one other person Tanzeem are stated to have committed gang-rape with her. The applicant was not found at her house at that time.
Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the FIR is delayed by about two months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Learned counsel has stated that FIR was lodged against Tanzeem and Jubair only but later on the said named co-accused persons were exonerated by the police and a closure report has been filed with respect to them but during investigation the final report (charge-sheet) has been filed against the applicant under Section 406 I.P.C. only and no amount has been mentioned in it to which applicant is liable towards the informant although as per the FIR the said amount is stated to be Rs.12 lakhs. Learned counsel has stated that the applicant has no criminal antecedents to her credit and she being a lady has been falsely implicated in this case. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against her. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that she has co-operated 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 could not dispute the fact that applicant is not named in the FIR.
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-applicant- Smt. Hazara be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) 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 Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. that the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
2. 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 her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
3. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
4. that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
5. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
6. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
7. that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.
Order Date :- 23.3.2023/ Vikas
