Allahabad High Court
Prema Chauhan vs State Of U.P. on 15 May, 2024
Author: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:87758
Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4656 of 2024
Applicant :- Prema Chauhan
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Raman Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1. Heard Sri Raman Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A as well as perused the material available on record.
2. This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.245 of 2013, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S.- Purani Basti, District- Basti.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased, aged about 62 years suffering from several old diseases. The applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. The cause of death has been opined by the doctor is due to asphyxia anti-mortem hanging. He submits that the applicant is heart patient and she cannot walk and sit. He submits that the applicant is fully co-operating with the investigation and investigation is still going on and till date no charge sheet has been submitted. 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 no previous criminal history. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that applicant has apprehension of imminent arrest and in case, applicant is released on anticipatory bail, she will not misuse the liberty and would co-operate with the trial.
4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant but could not dispute the submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant.
5. Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicant, she 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.
6. In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant- Prema Chauhan, 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:-
(i) 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.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
(iv) The applicant shall surrender her passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. Her passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(v) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she 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.
(vi) 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.
(vii) 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 her bail and proceed against her in accordance with law.
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.
8. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands allowed.
Order Date :- 15.5.2024
Krishna*
