Allowed

Girja Devi and 27 others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC3 Feb 2023ABAIL/12386/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court converted an interim anticipatory bail order granted on 13.8.2021 into an absolute one, extending protection until the submission of the police report or expiry of 90 days, subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail order dated 13.8.2021 is made absolute till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.

Girja Devi and 27 others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12386 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Girja Devi And 27 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- V.K.S. Somvanshi,Ajay Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶6

This Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been moved by the applicants seeking Anticipatory Bail in Case Crime No. 215 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 353, 427, 504, 506, 120-B IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932, Police Station Mangalpur, District Rama Bai Nagar (Kanpur Dehat).

¶7

On 13.8.2021, a coordinate Bench of this Court, while granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicants, has passed following order :-

¶8

"Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA and perused the record. Submission made by learned counsel for the applicants that in the present matter the applicant Girja Devi and 27 others have already obtained interim protection by way of 25.06.2021 by co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

¶9

Since, in the present anticipatory bail application, the applicants have already been obtained interim protection, for the execution of bail they shall furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer earlier vide order dated 25.06.2021. I have perused the earlier order passed on 25.06.2021 adopting the same reasons. Let the above order be confirmed with following conditions:-

¶10

(i) The applicants shall make himself available for the interrogation by the police as and when required. The Investigating Officer of the case would give 48 hours prior notice or telephonically inform the concerned accused-applicants to remain available to him for the purposes of interrogation and the accused-applicant is obliged to abide by such directions.

¶11

(ii) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threats or comments to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the correct facts to the court or to the police officer.

¶12

(iii) The Investigating Officer of the case would make all necessary endeavour to gear up the investigation in utmost transparent and professional way and would try to conclude the same within a maximum period of 90 days. During this period the accused-applicants would not leave the State of Uttar Pradesh without informing the Investigating Officer of the case and sharing their contact number.

¶13

(iv) In the event the applicants are having their passports, they will have to surrender the same before the concerned SP/SSP of the District till the submission of report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C.

¶14

In the event, the applicants breach or attempt to breach any of the aforesaid conditions or

¶15

wilfully violate above conditions or abstains themselves from the investigation, it would be open for the Investigating Officer or the concerned authority to apply before the court of Session for cancellation of interim protection and the Court of Session has every liberty and freedom to revoke the anticipatory bail after recording the reasons for the same.

¶16

While entertaining the instant anticipatory bail application before this Court, there is no concrete material on record except the canvassed apprehension of the applicants on their arrest and the severity of accusation made in the FIR against them. After being satisfied on the limited material, the interest/liberty of the applicants is protected by this Court with aforesaid riders during the course of investigation, after recording its nascent satisfaction. However, continuance of instant interim protection or ultimate fate of instant application would be decided, subject to the counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. and the material brought on record against the applicants during the investigation.

¶17

Learned A.G.A. should file counter affidavit soon after submission of report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. or 90 days, whichever is earlier.

¶18

Life of the instant protection would continue till the submission of charge sheet or 90 days, whichever is earlier.

¶19

List this anticipatory bail application after two months before appropriate Court."

¶20

Learned A.G.A. pointed out criminal history of the applicant no. 6 - Sarvesh. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that no charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. The applicants are cooperating with the investigation and did not misuse the liberty of aforesaid interim anticipatory bail which was granted on 13.8.2021 by the coordinate Bench of this Court.

¶21

In view of the above, aforesaid interim anticipatory bail order dated 13.8.2021 is made absolute till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. on the terms and conditions as indicated in the said order.

¶22

With the aforesaid observations and directions, the instant anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶23

Order Date :- 3.2.2023 DS

¶24

Digitally signed by :- DIGAMBER SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Girja Devi and 27 others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Girja Devi and 27 others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Mohammad Nazim and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P.

Sameer and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod Kumar Gupta @ Vinod Kumar Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Amitabh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Ramesh Vs State of U.P and Another

Sahdev Vs State of U.P. and Another