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

Shaista Siddiqui vs State Of U.P.

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|18 December, 2019

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record as well as Personal affidavit filed by State is also taken on record.
Heard Sri Nandit Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Pranjal Krishna, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Prosecution case as per the F.I.R. is that on an information was received by the Police through informant and by Sub Inspector, Yogendra that gang of persons including men and women who were indulge in the practice of fake registration in the Uttar Pradesh Pharmacy Council in lieu of money are conspiring for the commission of crime at the Goyal Chauraha, Kendriya Vidayalaya, Aliganj.
On such information, the police party arrested six men and a woman (present applicant) from the aforesaid place that is Goyal Chauraha, Kendriya Vidayalaya, Aliganj. From the accused applicant applicant 13 marksheet are alleged to have recovered and five certificates of diploma as well as the blank certificate six in number along with several other papers.
Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is a lady and house wife has no criminal history. He further submits that applicant has four year and nine year old children. Applicant has no criminal history and chargesheet against the present applicant has already been filed. He further submits that offences are triable by Magistrate. It is next contended that in fact the arrest as well as the recovery shown by the police of the present applicant is false and planted. The police had in fact apprehended the applicant on 24.10.2019. The husband of the applicant booked Ola Cab for the applicant at about 1:40 p.m. and the police party abducted the applicant from Dalibag Colony, Hazratganj at about 1:57 p.m., copy of receipt/run-sheet of the Ola Cab booked for the applicant is on record. When the applicant did not reach her office then the husband of the applicant called Customer Care representative of Ola Cab at about 3:33 p.m. and taken number of the driver Mr. Ran Vijay and the applicant as well as Customer Care representative called the driver of the taxi to know the whereabouts of the applicant, the details of the call log of the Ola driver are also on record. Thereafter husband of the applicant dialed emergency number 100 at about 5:02 p.m. and lodged a complaint for missing of his wife, the complaint number as well as the message received from the U.P. Dial-100 is on record. Thereafter the cell phone activity of applicant was tracked which showed that the mobile phone of the applicant was switched off near Police Chauki Galla Mandi area Aliganj, the copy of the screen shot containing the tracking of the mobile phone of the applicant is also on record. After coming to know the location of the applicant the husband of the applicant reached Aliganj Police Station on the same day i.e. 24.10.2019 at about 8:30 p.m. and found his wife detained by the police. Thereafter the concerned police officials ask for for the laptop of the applicant and reached the house of the applicant on the same day i.e. 24.10.2019 at about 11:30 p.m. along with the sister-in-law of the applicant. They took the laptop and also printer, this activity has also been recorded in C.C.T.V. installed in the house of the applicant. It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that nothing incriminating has been found in the laptop. The entire arrest and the recovery is false and the applicant is maliciously shown to have been arrested from the alleged side Goyal Chauraha. He further submits that applicant is in jail since 25.10.2019. Learned counsel for applicant further submits that applicant being a lady entitled for protection of 437 Cr.P.C.
It is lastly submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, for the period for which she is in jail and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.
Let the applicant, Shaista Siddiqui involved in Case Crime No. 475 of 2019, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station - Aliganj, District - Lucknow be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) 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 her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when 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.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
Order Date :- 18.12.2019 Shubhankar
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

Shaista Siddiqui vs State Of U.P.

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
18 December, 2019
Judges
  • Karunesh Singh Pawar