Smt. Bharti Devi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11346 of 2023 Applicant :- Smt. Bharti Devi And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kamal Singh Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed today by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶2Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Kamal Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material available on record.

¶3The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 0402 of 2020, under Sections 420, 406, 506, 504 of IPC, Police Station Kotwali Orai, District Jalaun, with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.

¶4As per prosecution story, the applicants are stated to have usurped an amount of Rs.30-35 lakhs of the informant and other persons on the pretext that they shall be accorded a job in the hospital.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that they are maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive and have apprehension of their arrest. They have nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. Learned counsel has further stated that there is a business transactions between the parties. Learned counsel has stated that Annexure-3 of the supplementary affidavit filed today in Court indicates the said transfer of amount from the account of applicant no.3 to the account of the informant. The case of money suit has been converted into a criminal one by the informant.

¶6Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicants to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against them. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicants have also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that the applicants have no criminal history. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed, they will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.

¶7On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicants and also the fact that the applicants have no criminal history.

¶8Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98" and also the fact that certain amount has been remitted back to the informant by the applicant no.3 and the matter being civil in nature, I find it a fit case to enlarge the applicants on anticipatory bail.

¶9Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed.

¶10In the event of arrest of the applicants, Smt. Bharti Devi, Ravindra and Pawan Kumar Panchal involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:- i. that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; ii. that the applicants 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 or tamper with the evidence; iii. that the applicants shall not leave India without previous permission of the court; iv. that the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; v. that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; vi. that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence are exempted;

¶11In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicants.

¶12It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicants shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. (Justice Krishan Pahal) Order Date :- 16.11.2023 Siddhant High Court of Judicature at Allahabad