Allowed

Smt. Shabnam v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Mar 2021ABAIL/9816/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to Smt. Shabnam in connection with offences under Sections 376-D, 120B IPC and Section 67 IT Act. Bail was released for 45 days or until cognizance is taken, subject to standard conditions including personal bond and cooperation with investigation.

What did the court decide?

Granted anticipatory bail for 45 days or until cognizance is taken, subject to personal bond and conditions including availability for interrogation and prohibition on leaving India.

Smt. Shabnam Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9816 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Shabnam Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anurag Pathak,Harshit Pathak

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Harshit Pathak, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶6

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Smt. Shabnam , with a prayer to release her on bail in Case Crime No. 199 of 2020, under Sections376-D, 120B, 506 I.P.C and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, Police Station- Shahpur, DistrictMuzaffar Nagar, during pendency of trial.

¶7

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of material brought on record as well as complicity of accused, she deserves to be enlarged on anticipatory bail for a period of 45 days or till the cognizance is taken by the Magistrate on the police report submitted u/s 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court, whichever is earlier, 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 Court, subject to the following conditions :-

¶8

(i) The applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required;

¶9

(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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶10

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

¶11

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

¶12

(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.

¶13

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

¶14

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation, if pending, of the present case in accordance 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.

¶15

The applicant is 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, if investigation is in progress, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

¶16

Order Date :- 18.3.2021 Rohit

¶17

Digitally signed by JUSTICE SIDDHARTH Date: 2021.03.22 11:21:28 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Shabnam v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Shabnam 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tinku Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Kumar Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P.

Harsh Tiwari @ Shivam and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Subhash and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aman @ Aman Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Laxmishankar Srivastava Vs State of U.P.