Allowed

Smt. Pushpa Sharma and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC1 Feb 2021ABAIL/175/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to applicants facing matrimonial harassment charges. Bail was ordered pending cognizance by the trial court, subject to conditions including availability for interrogation and restrictions on travel and tampering with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted till cognizance by the court on the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with sureties.

Smt. Pushpa Sharma and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 175 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Pushpa Sharma And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Harish Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA.

¶7

The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant an anticipatory bail to the applicants, namely, Neeraj Kushwaha, Prem Singh,Smt. Ganga Devi and Dheeraj, in Case Crime No. 257 of 2020, under Sections 498-A,323,504 I.P.C. and section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act , Police Station - Babina, District - Jhansi.

¶8

Prior notice of this bail application was served in the office of Government Advocate and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P., hence, this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned A.G.A as per Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. (U.P. Amendment) is not required.

¶9

By order dated 8.1.2021,learned A.G.A. was granted time to obtain instructions and arrest of the applicants was also stayed.Learned A.G.A. has received instructions.

¶10

Applicants are husband and other family members of the matrimonial home of the informant.The marriage of opposite party no.2 with applicant no.3 took place in the year 2014 and after six years of marriage allegations have been made for demand of dowry and consequential harassment. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted

¶11

that on account of misadjustment with opposite party no.2 she has falsely implicated the applicants.The First Information Report has been lodged after five years. No specif allegation has been made against the applicants in the First Information Report. The applicants have no criminal history to their credit. They have definite apprehension of their arrest by the police.

¶12

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant. He has submitted that in view of the seriousness of the allegations made against the applicant, he is not entitled to grant of anticipatory bail. The apprehension of the applicants are not founded on any material on record. Only on the basis of imaginary fear anticipatory bail cannot be granted.

¶13

After considering the rival submissions this court finds that there is a case registered against the applicant. It cannot be definitely said when the police may apprehend him. After the lodging of FIR the arrest can be made by the police at will. There is no definite period fixed for the police to arrest an accused against whom an FIR has been lodged. The courts have repeatedly held that arrest should be the last option for the police and it should be restricted to those exceptional cases where arresting the accused is imperative or his custodial interrogation is required. Irrational and indiscriminate arrests are gross violation of human rights. In the case of Joginder Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1994 SC 1349 the Apex Court has referred to the third report of National Police Commission wherein it is mentioned that arrests by the police in India is one of the chief source of corruption in the police. The report suggested that, by and large, nearly 60 percent of the arrests were either unnecessary or unjustified and that such unjustified police action accounted for 43.2 percent of expenditure of the jails. Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental rights and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative. According to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the peculiar case the arrest of an accused should be made.

¶14

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation

¶15

and his antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case for the limited period considering the exception considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98 .

¶16

In the event of arrest of the applicants shall be released on anticipatory bail till the cognizance is taken by the court on the police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on 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 with the following conditions:-

¶17

(i) The applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶18

(ii) The applicants 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office;

¶19

(iii) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶20

(iv) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶21

(v) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶22

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶23

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance

¶24

with law, expeditiously, independently without being prejudiced by any observations made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶25

The applicants are directed to produce a copy of this order downloaded from the official website of this Court before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

¶26

Order Date :- 1.2.2021 Atul kr. sri.

Smt. Pushpa Sharma and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Pushpa Sharma and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Afsar Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Randheer Vs State of U.P. and Another

Richa Singh Vs State of U.P.

Udaypratap Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dilshad Vs State of U.P.

Nadeem @ Bahra Vs State of U.P.