Allahabad High Court
Smt. Rajvati vs State Of U.P. And Another on 15 May, 2023
Bench: Nalin Kumar Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:105323
Court No. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4779 of 2023
Applicant :- Smt. Rajvati
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Shravan Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.
1. This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant Smt. Rajvati seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 0105 of 2018, under Sections 420, 430, 431, 432 IPC, Police Station Ecotec-I, District Gautam Budh Nagar.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and she has apprehension of her arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against her. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. The investigation of the case has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed and cognizance has been taken by the Court concerned. Applicant was cooperative during course of investigation. A ground of old age, sickness and illness has also been taken. It has been submitted that in case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.
4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that offence committed by the applicant relates straightway to the land and order situation in case any flood etc. in future and also is an indicative of defiance of Government Orders and specific directions of the National Green Tribunal.
5. In this matter, it has been alleged in the F.I.R. that construction of any kind has been restrained in the flood plain zone and to keep it as green zone land and in respect of this, specific instructions to take strict actions against the defaulters have been passed by the National Green Tribunal also. Present applicant in defiance with all the government instructions in collusion with other accused persons executed 117 sale deeds to several persons to develop abadi in the green zone land, which may cause a huge loss to the public and may cause danger to the public law and order situation as well in case of any flood situation. It reveals that after completion of investigation, charge sheet has been submitted and cognizance has also been taken by the Court concerned. Offences levelled against the applicant are punishable with the imprisonment upto seven years. During course of investigation, the applicant has cooperated with the Investigating Officer.
6. In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the controversy finally by holding the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.
7. It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial.
8. It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, llikelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.
9. Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, in my view, it is not a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant. Prayer made in the application is refused.
10. However, it is observed that the bail application of the applicant, if moved, shall be considered and decided by the Court concerned in terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825.
11. On the basis of request of the learned counsel for the applicant, it is further directed that the Court concerned while considering the bail application of the applicant in the light of Satender Kumar Antil case (supra), shall pass an order strictly in compliance of the directions given in the aforesaid judgment by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in letter and spirit, particularly complying with the order dated 21.3.2023 of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid matter.
12. The application stands disposed of accordingly.
Order Date :- 15.5.2023
safi
