Allahabad High Court
Usha vs State Of U.P. And Another on 9 October, 2023
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:193838
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10589 of 2023
Applicant :- Usha
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
2. This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 191 of 2023, under sections 498-A, 304-B/34 IPC and Section 3/4 of D. P. Act, P.S. Kasganj, District Kasganj during the pendency of trial.
3. As per prosecution case, marriage of informant's daughter was solemnized with Chandrapal two and half years ago as per Hindu rites in which informant is said to have spent about five lacs but the family members/in-laws were not happy with the dowry given and additionally they were demanding a motorcycle. It is further alleged that many times after the Panchayats were held he sent his daughter to her in-laws' house. Meanwhile, her daughter also gave birth to a female child but the process of demanding additional dowry from her in-laws did not end and her father-in-law, husband, sister-in-law (applicant), another sister-in-law and sister of her husband, brother-in-law together with committed death of the informant's daughter by strangulating her neck on 16/17.03.2023.
4- Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is lady, unmarried Nanad of victim and is completely innocent and in the above case, she is merely a family member and lives separately along with his father and she was not present on the date of incident. She has been falsely implicated due to malice. The post mortem report of the alleged deceased does not support the incident. No independent and impartial witness to the alleged incident has been shown. The applicant is a peace loving and law abiding woman and belongs to a good and respectable family. She has no criminal history and is not a convicted woman and is under section 437C. The applicant is having definite apprehension that she may be arrested by the police any time. It is further submitted that applicant is a student and preparing for competitive examinations.
5. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the said facts.
6. 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.
7. In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant Raman @ Charchit Pratap Singh 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 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;
(2) 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 to any police officer; and
(3) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
(4) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(5) 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.
(6) 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.
(7) 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 his bail and proceed against his in accordance with law.
8. 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.
9. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 9.10.2023
RavindraKSingh
