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

Suraksha Chaudhary vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|20 December, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 17999 of 2021 Applicant :- Suraksha Chaudhary Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Dixit Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A., today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for first informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.548 of 2021, under Sections 420, 407, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Surajpur, District Gautam Budh Nagar 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. As per prosecution version, first informant has booked his household articles through Global Packers and movers for sending the same from Noida to Jhansi but his articles/luggage were not delivered there and demand of additional amount was made from first informant. It has been submitted that the said firm is registered in the name of applicant but the firm related work is being done by her brother and her husband. The said firm is duly registered firm and that only some delay has taken place in delivery of luggage/articles of first informant. It was stated that articles/luggage of first informant have already been recovered and thus, no custodial interrogation of applicant is required for recovery. It has further been submitted that applicant is a lady and that she has no criminal antecedents and that no coercive process has been issued against the applicant so far. It was also submitted 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- Suraksha Chaudhary in the aforesaid case crime, he 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 :- 20.12.2021 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

Suraksha Chaudhary vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
20 December, 2021
Judges
  • Raj Beer Singh
Advocates
  • Ajeet Dixit