Allowed

Champa Devi @ Champa Rani and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2023ABAIL/1258/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma, J. allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by Champa Devi @ Champa Rani and Manoj Kumar regarding charges under IPC and Acts related to ration black marketing. The court held that a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

What did the court decide?

Applicants to be released on anticipatory bail on personal bond with sureties subject to specified conditions.

Champa Devi @ Champa Rani and Another Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 85

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1258 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Champa Devi @ Champa Rani And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vishal Tandon Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Vishal Tandon, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri O.P. Mishra, learned AGA for the State and perused the papers on record.

¶6

This application has been moved on behalf of the applicants- Champa Devi @ Champa Rani and Manoj Kumar seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.1003 of 2018, under Sections- 420, 465, 468, 470, 471 I.P.C. and Sections- 3/7 Essential Commodities Act and Section- 66D I.T. (Amendment) Act, 2000 and Section- 34 of Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016, Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Muzaffarnagar.

¶7

As per prosecution case, the present applicants who were licence holders for running fair price shop had edited the adhar numbers of the beneficiaries to usurp the articles and to give the benefit to others. It is alleged in the F.I.R,. that they manipulated database in a well planned manner for black-marketing of ration.

¶8

It is contended on behalf of the applicants that it is not possible for licensed shop owners to manipulate the database in the E-pos machine unless they possess a very good technical expertise. It is further contended that the function of E-pos machine involves only putting thumb impression and details of the quantity of ration, related things and the quantity of ration to be distributed to the persons entitled is displayed. It is also submitted that they are named in the F.I.R. by the superior officers just to save themselves from prosecution/enquiry.

¶9

It is brought to my notice that the applicants' arrest was stayed by order dated 28.11.2018 in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition no.34262 of 2018. It is further argued that the applicants are innocent and have no criminal antecedents and shall abide by conditions imposed by this Court.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶11

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.

¶12

In the instant case, I considered submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, in my view a case for anticipatory bail is made out. Hence, the present anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicants Champa Devi @ Champa Rani and Manoj Kumar involved in the aforesaid case crime number be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each of the same amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the conditions as below:-

¶14

(i) that the applicants shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶15

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

¶16

(iii) that the applicants shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;

¶17

(iv) that the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶18

(v) that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶19

(vi) that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted.

¶20

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

¶21

10. It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicants shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion at any stage of the case based on material before him.

¶22

Order Date :- 22.2.2023 Asha

¶23

Digitally signed by :- ASHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Champa Devi @ Champa Rani and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Champa Devi @ Champa Rani and Another v. State of U.P.

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

Ramsunder Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Kiran and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jaswant Vs State of U.P and Another

Anuj Kumar @ Golu @ Piyush Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.