Usha Tayal and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 83

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2004 of 2023

Applicant :- Usha Tayal And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kameshwar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

List has been revised.

¶6

Heard Sri Kameshwar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶7

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case Crime No.634 of 2018, registered under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 IPC, Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act, Section 66D Information of Technology Act and Section 34 The Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 at Police Station- Civil Line, District Muzaffar Nagar with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.

¶8

As per prosecution story, the applicants are the proprietor of the fair price shop and are stated to have fudged the details of the BPL card holders thereby interpolating their Aadhaar Cards.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. They have nothing to do with the said offence. They are bona fide persons. The forgery, if any, has been committed by the office. Learned counsel has further stated that the charge-sheet has already been submitted. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicants to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against them. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicants have also been touched upon at length. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicant. The applicants have apprehension of their arrest. Learned counsel for the applicants undertakes that they have co-operated in the investigation and are ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the

¶11

submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicants.

¶12

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants, the applicants are 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 applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶13

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the accused-applicants- Usha Tayal, Gaurav Tayal, Abhijeet and Sunil Kumar 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:-

¶14

(i). that the applicants shall make themselves 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 them 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 the previous permission of the court;

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

(vi). that 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.

¶21

(Krishan Pahal, J.)

¶22

Order Date :- 26.4.2023 Ravi Kant

¶23

Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Usha Tayal and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Usha Tayal and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Ravi Vs State of U.P.

Harshit Chaubey @ Abhishek Bhargav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Jalim Vs State of U.P.

Anup Kumar Vs State of U.P and Another

Hasan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Ratna Mishra Vs State of U.P.