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

Smt Sunita Devi @ Sunita vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|27 September, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 16057 of 2021 Applicant :- Smt.Sunita Devi @ Sunita Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mahendra 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.
Office is directed to correct the name of the applicant in the title head of the order.
This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicant Smt.Sunita Devi @ Sunita in Case Crime No. 51 of 2019, S.S.T. No. 259 of 2019, under sections 363, 366, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Baniyather, District Sambhal.
Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is the woman and she has been falsely implicated in this case. It has been further submitted that earlier the co- accused Pintu @ Saurabh has already been granted regular bail passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.36834 of 2019, copy whereof has been annexed at page 42 of the anticipatory bail application. 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 prayer of bail and has submitted that the charge sheet has already been filed.
Considered the submissions of both the sides. If it is so, the applicant should have taken recourse of regular bail instead of given this application for anticipatory bail. It appears that the charge sheet has already been filed and case has been committed to session. It also appears that the FIR has been lodged on 23.02.2019 as such, the application for anticipatory bail has been given after a delay of almost two and half years. 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.
A direction is, however, given to the court below that in case, applicant surrenders and gives bail application, the same shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously, in accordance with law, keeping in view that the applicant is the woman.
Order Date :- 27.9.2021 Mini
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 Sunita Devi @ Sunita vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
27 September, 2021
Judges
  • Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
Advocates
  • Mahendra Singh