Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Smt Saroj vs State Of U P And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|17 December, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 19137 of 2021 Applicant :- Smt. Saroj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- R.P.S. Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant today, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.697 of 2017, under Sections 147, 324, 308 I.P.C., Police Station Chandausi, District Sambhal with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and she has an apprehension that she may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas, there is no credible evidence against her. It was stated that FIR has been lodged against five accused persons including applicant. The allegations that applicant has caused injury to injured persons, is false and baseless. It has been stated that all the five injured persons have sustained merely simple injuries and thus, no case under Section 308 IPC is made out. It was stated that case pertains to the year 2017 and cognizance was taken on 30.03.2018 but so far no coercive process has been issued against applicant. It was also stated that regarding same incident, a cross FIR was lodged from the side of applicant vide crime no. 177 of 2018, under Sections 392, 323, 427 IPC, P.S.
Chandausi, District Sambhal and that five persons have sustained injuries from the side of applicant. It was also stated that on 09.09.2021 only bailable warrants have been issued against applicant. It has further been submitted that applicant is a lady and that she has no criminal antecedents and that applicant undertakes to co-operate during investigation and trial and she would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate during investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail.
It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.
In the instant case, considering 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 on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.
The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
In the event of arrest of the applicant- Smt. Saroj involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned/Court below concerned with the following conditions :-
(i) the applicant shall make himself 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/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iii) the applicant would co-operate during investigation and trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail.
In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
Order Date :- 17.12.2021 Neeraj
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

Smt Saroj vs State Of U P And Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
17 December, 2021
Judges
  • Raj Beer Singh
Advocates
  • R P S Chauhan