Nisha Pandey v. State of U.P

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11033 of 2023 Applicant :- Nisha Pandey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Kumar Madhesia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶1This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant - Nisha Pandey seeking anticipatory bail in Criminal Case No. 534 of 2017, Case Crime No. 141 of 2015, under Sections 376, 511, 120-B IPC, Police Station Sarnath, District Varanasi.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶3It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and she has apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against her. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. It is further submitted that the named accused persons in the F.I.R. in collusion with each other had kidnapped the daughter of the applicant for some ulterior motive. It is also submitted that the applicant, who is the real mother of the victim, wanted her marriage to be settled with some Butthu Tiwari and since the victim was not ready for the same, she made a twisted statements under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC and levelled several allegations against the present applicant, as she was willing to marry with some other person. Applicant is a lady having no criminal history to her credit. After completion of investigation, charge sheet has been submitted in the matter and the applicant has been cooperative during investigation. No process under Sections 82 and 83 CrPC has been issued against the applicant and the applicant has not been declared absconder. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶4Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶5I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

¶6From the perusal of the record it reveals that the minor daughter of the informant was kidnapped by main accused Vishal Rajbhar and his family members and friends. F.I.R. was lodged and investigation started and during course of investigation it was found that the informant had lodged the F.I.R. on the basis of wrong and fabricated facts and that is why the informant, who is the present applicant, was arrayed as an accused in this matter and matter was converted to Sections 376, 511 and 120-B IPC and now charge sheet has been submitted. From the perusal of the record it also reveals that in this matter an attempt to rape has been charged and the present applicant is a lady. Charge sheet has been submitted and no custodial interrogation is required in the matter.

¶7In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the law on the subject finally by holding that the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial. It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial. It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

¶8Considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till the end of trial.

¶9The application is allowed accordingly.

¶10In the event of arrest of the applicant, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/-with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall make himself available before the Court concerned on the date fixed in the matter and will cooperate in the trial.

(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/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office.

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

¶11In case of default of any of the conditions, the same may be a ground for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant. Order Date :- 1.11.2023 safi High Court of Judicature at Allahabad