Janntun Nisha v. State of U.P

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12475 of 2023 Applicant :- Janntun Nisha Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ghan Shyam Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶2This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant - Janntun Nisha seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.273 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 506 IPC, Police Station Mehdawal, District Sant Kabir Nagar.

¶3The present applicant obtained a sale deed in her favour allegedly executed by the father of the informant through an imposter, as Matelu, the father of the informant was not alive on the date of execution of the sale deed and thereby the applicant caused a huge monetary loss to the informant and forcible possession of the property was also taken. F.I.R. was lodged on

9.7.2023 and investigation started, which is going on.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicants submits that that applicant is innocent and she has apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against her. She has been falsely implicated in this matter. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. Investigation is going on into the matter. It is further submitted that the applicant is a bonafide purchaser of the property in question. She was not aware that the vender of the sale deed is an imposter. The applicant has paid the requisite consideration amount for the execution of the sale deed. It is further submitted that the informant has also filed a civil suit, which is still pending before the civil court at Sant Kabir Nagar and is being contested by the present applicant. Applicant is a lady having no criminal history to her credit and she is cooperating with the investigation of the case and as such, she is entitled for anticipatory bail. In case the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶5Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail, but however he could not dispute this factual matrix that a civil suit between the parties is pending in respect of cancellation of sale deed.

¶6In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held 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.

¶7In Siddharth Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, (2022) 1 Supreme Court Cases 676, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that personal liberty is an important aspect of our constitutional mandate. The occasion to arrest an accused during investigation arises when custodial investigation becomes necessary or it is a heinous crime or where there is a possibility of influencing the witnesses or accused may abscond. Merely because an arrest can be made because it is lawful does not mandate that arrest must be made. A distinction must be made between the existence of the power to arrest and the justification for exercise of it. If arrest is made routine, it can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self-esteem of a person. If the Investigating Officer has no reason to believe that the accused will abscond or disobey summons and has, in fact, throughout cooperated with the investigation, then there is no compulsion on the officer to arrest the accused.

¶8Considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till the filing of police report under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court.

¶9The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶10In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, she shall be released on anticipatory bail till the filing of police report under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/-with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

(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 she has passport, the same shall be deposited by her before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶11In case of default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant. Order Date :- 22.11.2023 ss High Court of Judicature at Allahabad