Allowed

Manauti Devi @ Manotiya v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC24 Jan 2023ABAIL/1443/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan, J. considered an application seeking to make an earlier interim anticipatory bail order absolute. The applicant, accused of corruption in PMAY house allotment, argued lack of charge sheet and cooperation with investigation. The Court observed no misuse of interim bail and approved the request.

What did the court decide?

The interim anticipatory bail order dated 03.03.2020 is made absolute till submission of police report under Section 173(3) Cr.P.C. on the recorded terms and conditions.

Manauti Devi @ Manotiya Vs State of U.P. — Corruption | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1443 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Manauti Devi @ Manotiya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Prakash Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Shri Prakash Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Rakesh Soni, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.42 of 2019, under Sections 467, 468, 471, 419, 420, 409, 119, 120, 120-B, 192, 193, 196, 198, 200 I.P.C., P.S. Haliya, District-Mirzapur, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶7

On 03.03.2020, Co-ordinate Bench of this Court while granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant, has passed the following order:-

¶8

"1. Heard Sri Shri Prakash Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, and Sri B.A. Khan , learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶9

2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been moved, seeking bail in Case Crime No. 42 of 2019, under Sections 467, 468, 471, 419, 420, 409, 119, 120, 120-B, 192, 193, 196, 198 & 200 IPC, Police Station - Haliya, District - Mirzapur, during pendency of investigation.

¶10

3. As per F.I.R., an inquiry appears to have been held in respect of 28 houses belonging to Pradhanmantri Awas Yojna, which were meant to be allotted to eligible candidates and it is found that several irregularities/illegalities were committed by crediting the amount of the said houses in other accounts, rather than in the account of eligible candidates and huge number of accused have been shown in the present F.I.R.

¶11

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that as far as the case of the applicant is concerned, she was eligible for getting the house loan for purchase of the house under Pradhanmantri Awas Yojna and accordingly, she was given a sum of Rs. 1,30,000/- and she has utilized in construction. She has not committed any offence. She was eligible for the said house because of belonging to Kol caste and being poor. She has no criminal history. She apprehends her imminent arrest. If released on bail, she would cooperate with the investigation.

¶12

5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of granting anticipatory bail and has submitted that applicant had got an amount of Rs. 1,30,000/- credited in her account in collusion with others, along with block employees.

¶13

6. Looking to the fact that it has not been stated from the side of prosecution that the applicant was not eligible for getting the house loan/house, taking into consideration the gravity of accusation, there being no criminal antecedent of the applicant and there being no possibility of her fleeing from justice, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the

¶14

case, the applicant is entitled to be released on interim anticipatory bail in this case.

¶15

7. List this case on April 22, 2020 and by the said date, counter affidavit be filed from the side of learned A.G.A.

¶16

8. In the event of arrest of the applicant Manauti Devi @ Manotiya involved in the aforesaid case, she shall be released on interim anticipatory bail during investigation till the date fixed, on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned on the on the following conditions :

¶17

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

¶18

2. 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;

¶19

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

¶20

4. that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officers shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant. "

¶21

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that till date no charge sheet has been submitted and investigation is still going on. He further submits that applicant has always co-operated in the investigation and has not misused the liberty of aforesaid interim anticipatory bail, which was granted to her on 03.03.2020 by co-ordinate bench of this Court. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegation made against her. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant has also been touched upon at length. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that she has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.

¶22

Learned A.G.A. for the State does not dispute the aforesaid factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the applicant.

¶23

In view of the above, aforesaid interim anticipatory bail order dated 03.03.2020 is made absolute till submission of police report under Section 173(3) Cr.P.C. on the terms and conditions as indicated in the above order dated 03.03.2020.

¶24

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

¶25

Order Date :- 24.1.2023 Rahul.

¶26

Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Manauti Devi @ Manotiya v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manauti Devi @ Manotiya 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Muslim Vs State of U.P.

Arvind Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suresh Chaudhary Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Guddu @ Jamshed Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Arvind Mishra and Another Vs State of U.P.