Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38541 of 2019 Applicant :- Rehana And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Roy Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, over this Anticipatory Bail Application, under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code, moved by the applicants, Rehana, Habibunisha, Mustafa and Sikandar, with a prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, during the course of investigation in Case Crime No. 177 of 2019, under sections 354Ka, 452, 323 and 504 of Indian Penal Code, Police Station- Lohta, District-Varanasi, as well as learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicants argued that the accused-applicants are innocent. They have been falsely implicated in this very case crime number because of there being a property dispute amongst informant and accused persons. This report was got lodged with accusation of outraging modesty of the informant by accused-applicant, Sikandar, who is brother-in-law of the informant. Rest of accused-applicants are real brother, sister and sister-in-law. They have been assigned role of giving assault to the informant, while she protested and complained about outraging of modesty. Subsequently, in the statement, recorded, under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., role of outraging modesty was assigned to her brother-in-law, Sikandar and this shows that how a property dispute, amongst family members, has been converted into a criminal case. Each of the accused-applicants are of no criminal antecedents. Hence, a prayer, for anticipatory bail, has been made.
Learned AGA, representing State of U.P., has vehemently opposed bail application.
Having heard learned counsel for both sides and gone through the first information report, it is apparent that the informant is real sister and sister-in-law of accused persons and was residing at her parental house where she was having a shop of her own and the accused persons, being sister, brother and brother-in-law, only for the purposes of having the property partitioned, did this protest during course of which this occurrence was alleged.
Under all above facts and circumstances, but without commenting on merits of the case, a case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.
In the event of arrest of the applicants, Rehana, Habibunisha, Mustafa and Sikandar, involved in above mentioned case, shall be released on anticipatory bail till submission of police report, if any, under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties, each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned, with following conditions:-
(i) the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police office as and when required;
(ii) 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 office;
(iii) the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passports, the same shall be deposited 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 applicants.
The applicants are 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.
In view of aforesaid, the application for anticipatory bail is, accordingly, allowed.
Order Date :- 30.9.2019 bgs/