Vijay Lakshmi Singh Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:118366

Court No. - 83

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12876 of 2022

Applicant :- Vijay Lakshmi Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar,Amresh Bahadur Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶8

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.166 of 2020, registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. at Police Station- Nagar, District Basti with a prayer to enlarge her on anticipatory bail.

¶9

As per prosecution story, the applicant, who happens to be Principal of the institution, is stated to have got the said job on the basis of fake documents.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that she has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel has stated that the FIR is delayed as the inquiry was taken up in absentia of the applicant without hearing her. The ex-parte proceedings cannot be taken up against the applicant. Learned counsel has stated that the applicant was granted interim protection by this Court vide order dated 13.10.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.6654 of 2020, but during the COVID-19 pandemic the said application was dismissed for want of prosecution, as such this anticipatory bail application was filed. The applicant is a lady and has no criminal history to her credit. During the pendency of the present application, the final report (charge-sheet) has been filed. 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. The applicant has apprehension of her arrest Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that she has co-operated in

¶11

the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1" . The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶14

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Vijay Lakshmi Singh be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶22

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

¶23

[Krishan Pahal, J.]

¶24

Order Date :- 26.5.2023 Vikas

¶25

Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vijay Lakshmi Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Lakshmi Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Uday Bahadur Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashutosh Dubey Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Harikesh Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Paramveer Vs State of U.P.

Durgesh Tiwari Vs State of U.P. . and Another

Rajkumar Srivastava Vs State of U.P.