Allahabad High Court
Smt. Shabeena Bano Alias Samina vs State Of U.P. on 30 May, 2024
Author: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:98941
Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4486 of 2024
Applicant :- Smt. Shabeena Bano Alias Samina
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Azhar Hussain,Ravitendra Pratap Singh Chandel
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1. This is second anticipatory bail application of the applicant. The first anticipatory bail application was rejected by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 02.02.2023 passed by Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma, J. passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.12507 of 2022, copy of order has been annexed as Annexure No.1 to the affidavit.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
3. This anticipatory bail application (under Section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.359 of 2022, under Sections 306 and 506 IPC read with Section 67 of Information Technology Act, Police Station Fatehgarh, District Farrukhabad.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case just to harass the applicant. The applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. The impugned FIR is highly delayed about 12 days for which no plausible explanation has been mentioned. He further submits that similarly placed co-accused, namely, Ashu Urf Altaf Ahmad has already been granted anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.05.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.4404 of 2024, copy of order has been placed on record. Another similarly placed co-accused, namely, Shahid Khan Gauri @ Shahyad Gauri and Hidal Khan @ Dulla Bhai have also been granted anticipatory bail by another coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.03.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.12987 of 2022, copy of order has also been annexed as Annexure No.10 to the affidavit. He further submits that since the similarly placed co-accused have also been granted anticipatory bail, the applicant is also entitled for the same relief. The applicant is having no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant.
6. 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.
7. In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant-Smt. Shabeena Bano Alias Samina, involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial 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 her 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.
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 is disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.5.2024
Ajeet
