Amrawati and Another v. State of U.P.State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 71 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12226 of 2023 Applicant :- Amrawati And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Rathore,Sanjeev Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶1Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶3This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.615 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 304 B IPC an 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Firozabad North, District Firozabad.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case, in fact, no such incident has taken place. The applicants have never committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR.The applicants are mother-in-law and father in law of the deceased. Earlier the applicants have approached this Court by filing Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.12292 of 2022 in which interim protection was granted till submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. vide order dated 28.02.2023. Now charge sheet has been submitted. He further submits that during investigation, no credible evidence was found against the applicants. He further submits that during investigation, the informant has turned hostile. The applicants are having no previous criminal history as has been mentioned in paragraph 34 of the affidavit. He further submits that applicants have apprehension of imminent arrest and in case, the applicants are released on anticipatory bail, they will not misuse the liberty and would co-operate with the trial.

¶5Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicants but could not dispute the aforesaid contentions raised by learned counsel for the applicants.

¶6Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicants, they are 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 applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶7In the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicants-Amrawati and Shankar Pal, 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 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(ii) The applicants shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

(iii) The applicants shall surrender their passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. Their passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.

(iv) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants.

(v) In case, the applicants misuse 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.

(vi) The applicants 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 their bail and proceed against them in accordance with law.

¶8In 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 applicants.

¶9With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application is disposed of. Order Date :- 4.12.2023/Ajeet High Court of Judicature at Allahabad