Shiv Kumari v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10894 of 2023 Applicant :- Shiv Kumari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arvind Kumar Singh,Kumar Kartikeya Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard Sri R.K. Paramhansh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Vinay Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Kumar Kartikeya, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Deepak Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶3The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.104 of 2023, registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. at Police Station-Robertsganj, District-Sonbhadra with a prayer to enlarge her on anticipatory bail.

¶4As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have purchased the land belonging to the wife of the informant by impersonating her. The FIR has been instituted by her husband Jai Singh.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant stands explained vide supplementary affidavit and the copy of bail order has been filed as Annexure-SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit dated

13.10.2023. Learned counsel has stated that the applicant is a bona fide purchaser and she herself has been duped of her hard earned money. The applicant later on came to know about the said forgery committed with her, as such, she instituted an FIR as Case Crime No.175 of 2023 against the imposters. The applicant had even given them a cheque worth Rs.10,53,333/- which was realized by the imposters Jai Singh, Ajai Singh and Shanti Devi on 2.2.2023.

¶6Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the applicant being a lady is entitled for anticipatory bail. 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.

¶7Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application on the ground that the co-accused persons named in FIR/Case Crime No.175 of 2023 and the applicant and other co-accused persons are all hand-in-glove with each other and hatched conspiracy to dupe the informant of her property. Learned counsel has further stated that the criminal history of the applicant indicates towards her complicity in the crime of similar nature.

¶8In rebuttal, learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant pertains to compensation awarded by NHAI and is different in nature, as such, the applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail.

¶9On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel 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 the applicant is a bona fide purchaser, 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.

¶10In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant-Shiv Kumari 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.

¶11It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial. Order Date :- 28.10.2023 Vikas [Krishan Pahal, J.] High Court of Judicature at Allahabad