Renu Singh vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 20408 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Renu Singh vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 3 June, 2024

Author: Krishan Pahal

Bench: Krishan Pahal

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:100780
 
Court No. - 75
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5393 of 2024
 
Applicant :- Renu Singh
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Aditya Sharma,Rajneesh Sharma,Virendra Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
 

1. Heard Sri Virendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned AGA for the State and also perused the material available on records.

2. The applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Case Crime No. 0274 of 2023, under Sections 409, 166A, 175, 176 IPC, Police Station- Nawabganj, District- Prayagraj.

3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicants have claimed parity with the co-accused Geeta Devi, who has already been granted anticipatory bail by another Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 5557 of 2024 vide order dated 31.5.2024. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Since the case of the applicant is at par with the co-accused who has already been granted anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, the applicant is also entitled for the same on the ground of parity.

4. The prayer for anticipatory bail has been vehemently opposed by learned AGA. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by him.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and in light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgement passed by the Supreme Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021, coupled with the judgment of Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 825 without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed on the ground of parity.

6. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed with following directions:-

(A) In the event of arrest of the applicant involved in aforesaid case shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on his/her furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned;

(B) 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;

(C) 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and

(D) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if she has a passport, the same shall be deposited by her before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

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.

Order Date :- 3.6.2024

Shalini

(Justice Krishan Pahal)