Allahabad High Court
Anjali vs State Of U.P. And Another on 18 September, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:180177
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10192 of 2023
Applicant :- Anjali
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ghan Shyam,Satyendra Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jitendra Kumar,Keshav Hari Dixit,Purushottam Dixit
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Satyendra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Purushottam Dixit, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Ram Mohit Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 199 of 2023, registered under Sections 147, 149, 304, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. at Police Station- Bharthana, District- Etawah with a prayer to enlarge her on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant alongwith six other named co-accused persons are stated to have been found encroaching upon the land of the informant and are stated to have assaulted her husband, thereby he fell down and was rushed to hospital where he succumbed to the injuries.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The FIR is delayed by about four days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Learned counsel has stated that the victim died of syncope cardiac arrest, as such, it cannot be assigned to have been caused by any trauma. Learned counsel has further stated that the inquest proceedings were conducted the same day and it mentions that no injuries were observed on the body of the deceased person. The postmortem report mentions one contusion 4 cm x 3 cm mid parietal and occipital organ of head but it has not been mentioned to be the cause of death of the deceased person. The applicant is a lady and no role has been assigned to her. The applicant has no criminal history to her credit.
6. 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. The applicant has apprehension of her arrest Learned counsel has stated that 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.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application on the ground that one injury of contusion was found on the head of the deceased person, as such, it indicates towards the complicity of the applicant and other co-accused persons, but they could not dispute the fact that there is no other injury on any vital part of the deceased person and also the fact that inquest report does not indicate any injury on the body of the deceased person.
8. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsels for the parties as well as learned A.G.A., considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant and taking into consideration that inquest report does not indicate any injury sustained by the deceased person and the cause of death being cardiac arrest, 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.
9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Anjali 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 court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i). that the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii). 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;
(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
10. 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 :- 18.9.2023
Vikas
[Krishan Pahal, J.]
