Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Mannu @ Manvati Devi vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|26 September, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37992 of 2019 Applicant :- Mannu @ Manvati Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the first information report as well as rejection order.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is Mausi of the informant; the first information report has been lodged by the informant containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the applicant with the ulterior intention of harassing her; the matter needs deeper and fairer investigation before any arrest should be given effect to; the applicant will participate and cooperate with the investigation; apart from the bald allegations made in the first information report, no evidence is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the complicity of the applicant. It is stated that arrest of husband of opposite party no. 2 Vipin Kumar has been stayed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition no. 16060 of 2019 vide order dated 11.6.2019. Therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and having no criminal antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.
In the event of arrest of the applicant Mannu @ Manvati Devi involved in Case Crime No. 004 of 2019, u/s 363, 366, 506, 376, 509, 328, 120-B IPC, P.S. Khuldabad, District Prayagraj, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report if any under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(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.
In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order independently without being prejudice by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.
The applicant is directed to produce a certified copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.
Let the copy of this order be sent by the Registrar General of this Court to Sessions Judge concerned for it's compliance.
In view of the aforesaid, the application for anticipatory bail is, accordingly, allowed.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the first information report has been lodged by the informant containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the applicant with the ulterior intention of harassing him; the matter needs deeper and fairer investigation before any arrest should be given effect to; the applicant will participate and cooperate with the investigation; apart from the bald allegations made in the first information report, no evidence is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the complicity of the applicant.
Order Date :- 26.9.2019 Dhirendra/
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Mannu @ Manvati Devi vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
26 September, 2019
Judges
  • Rajul Bhargava
Advocates
  • Santosh Singh