Allowed

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

Allahabad HC28 Nov 2022ABAIL/11883/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving unlawful assembly and torture. The court accepted the applicant's plea of innocence and lack of criminal history, relying on the Apex Court decision in Sushila Aggarwal. Bail is granted subject to personal bond, conditions regarding interrogation, no tampering with evidence or witnesses, and appearance at trial.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties on specified conditions.

Smt. Sunita Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11883 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Sunita Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Kumar,Ajay Kumar Giri Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Giri, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.M. Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶6

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 269 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 506, 332, 336, 504 IPC, Police Station-Kotwali Nagar Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, with the prayer to enlarge her on anticipatory bail.

¶7

As per prosecution story, the applicant and other persons are said to have formed an unlawful assembly and restrained the traffic on 8.12.2021 at about 11.30 am peeved by an act of the murder of the brother of one Neelam in Case Crime No. 188 of 2021.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize her. There is no criminal history of the applicant. It is further stated that applicant is co-operating in the investigation and is ready to cooperate in future also. There is no likelihood of the applicant repeating the said offence, if any. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against her. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and the fact that applicant has no criminal history.

¶10

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT

¶11

of Delhi)-(2020) 5 SCC 1", the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

¶12

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed . In the event of arrest, let the accusedapplicant Smt. Sunita be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned/Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

that the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶14

that 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶15

that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶16

that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶17

that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶18

that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶20

It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial or deciding the regular bail application.

¶21

Order Date :- 28.11.2022 Shalini

¶22

Digitally signed by SHALINI JAISWAL Date: 2022.11.28 18:36:12 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Sunita 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

Prashant Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Dilshad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahul Shukla Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bhagwan Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ankit Pachauri Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Indra Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another