Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8978 of 2021 Applicant :- Shanti Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Shankar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicant Shanti Devi in Case Crime No. 842 of 2019, under sections 364, 120B, 506 I.P.C., P.S.-Jhunsi, District - Allahabad.
The F.I.R. was lodged with the allegation that earlier the accused persons with one Ranjeet kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant and she was recovered. After investigation charge-sheet was filed. To pressurize the informant side for settlement out side the court, the accused persons kidnapped the minor daughter again, therefore, the F.I.R. was lodged.
Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the victim has been recovered and she has given statement under section 164 Cr.PC. It has been submitted by the learned counsel that during trial victim has already been examined and she has not supported the F.I.R. version, therefore, prima facie case for anticipatory bail is made out. It is further submitted that applicant has no criminal history and applicant is prepared to furnish sureties and bonds, there is no possibility of her either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the evidence.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayed of bail and has submitted that the statement of victim recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded in another trial in which victim has turned hostile. Further submission is that the fact which has been raised in the anticipatory bail application should have been raised in regular bail application and there is no reason for the applicant to come in the anticipatory bail as trial has already commenced.
If it is so, it could have been good ground for regular bail for the applicant, there was no reason for the applicant to come for anticipatory bail before this Court. It is pertinent to mention that the anticipatory bail is not a substitute of a regular bail and for it, some extraordinary circumstances are required in comparison to regular bail. There should be some special reason for taking recourse of the provisions of anticipatory bail. There must also be a threat of arrest of the accused. The applicant has not been able to show any real threat of arrest or any extraordinary circumstances, as such, I do not find any ground for giving benefit of anticipatory bail, hence the anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant is rejected, with liberty to the applicant to go for regular bail before the appropriate Court where all those facts which has been raised may be considered by the court.
Order Date :- 27.7.2021 Bhanu