Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8517 of 2021 Applicant :- Sandeep Singh Sikarwar And 2 Other Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sahibe Alam
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This is an application of the anticipatory bail given by the applicants Sandeep Singh Sikarwar, Lokendra Singh and Smt. Laxmi in Case Crime No. 658 of 2020, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 313, 328, 120B, 427 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S.- Kotwali, District Etawah.
A detailed FIR has been lodged under the aforesaid sections with variety of allegations such as demanding dowry, harassing on account of non-fulfillment of dowry, causing miscarriage, committed maarpeet, living with some other woman and other allegations of like nature.
The submission of the learned counsel for the appellants is that the applicant no.1 was married with opposite party no.2 in May, 2017. On the basis of false allegation, the FIR has been lodged. There are some matrimonial differences are as become the reason for this case. If the applicants send to jail possibility of any amicable settlement will be over, therefore, a prima facie case is made out for anticipatory bail. It is further submitted that applicants have no criminal history and applicants are prepared to furnish surety and bond, there is no possibility of their either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the evidence, therefore, applicants are entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. have opposed and have submitted that there are serious allegation against the husband and as such there is no case for anticipatory bail.
Considered the submissions of both the sides, it appears that there is no specific allegation against the applicant nos. 2 and 3. Allegations have been made against the applicant no.1 who is the husband and against him there are serious allegations, therefore, the applicant no.1 does not deserve for anticipatory bail and he may go for regular bail before the appropriate forum. Therefore, this application is rejected against the applicant no.1.
In so far as the applicant nos. 2 and 3 are concerned, there is no specific allegations against them and if there are some allegations they are triable in nature and in favour of them a prima facie case for anticipatory bail is made out, therefore, I find it to be a fit case in which anticipatory bail may be granted to the applicant nos. 2 and 3. Hence the anticipatory bail application of applicant nos. 2 and 3 is allowed.
In the event of arrest, the applicant nos.2 and 3 namely Lokendra Singh and Smt. Laxmi be released on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 658 of 2020, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 313, 328, 120B, 427 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S.- Kotwali, District Etawah, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer /C.J.M./ Court of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-
1) The applicant nos.2 and 3 shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
2) The applicant nos.2 and 3 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 or tamper with the evidence;
3) The applicant nos.2 and 3 shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
4) In default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officers shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant nos.2 and 3.
5. In case of filing of charge-sheet they shall appear before the court concerned for suitable orders according to section 438(3) Cr.P.C. and other condition which may be imposed by the Magistrate or the court concerned.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad and the concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
The applicant nos.2 and 3 are directed to produce a copy of this order downloaded from the official website of this Court before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today.
Order Date :- 30.7.2021 Mini