Allowed

Smt. Long Sri v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC2 Aug 2023ABAIL/8617/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Handled an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. regarding cases of grievous hurt and criminal intimidation. The court granted bail, citing the applicant's cooperative behavior and lack of criminal history, and imposed conditions including a personal bond and surrender of passport.

What did the court decide?

The application for anticipatory bail was allowed till the end of trial, subject to a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and specific conditions.

Smt. Long Sri Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:154150

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8617 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Smt. Long Sri Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Prakash Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant Smt. Long Sri seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 453 of 2022, under Sections 308, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Sumerpur, District Hamirpur.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and she has apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against her. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. It is further submitted that i in the F.I.R. general role has been assigned to the applicant with the co-accused and as a matter of fact the implication of co-accused Kuldeep Kumar was found false and final report was submitted against him by the Investigating Officer. Applicant is a lady and she is having no criminal history. During course of investigation, notice under Section 41-A CrPC was given to her and she was cooperative with the I.O. After completion of investigation, charge sheet has been submitted in the matter. No process under Sections 82 and 83 CrPC has been issued against the applicant and the applicant has not been declared absconder. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that a fracture has been found in post temporal bone in x-ray report and the concerned doctor has corroborated the same in his statement recorded under Section 161 CrPC but could not dispute the factual aspect that in the F.I.R. general role has been assigned to the accused persons and applicant has no criminal history.

¶10

I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

¶11

Prosecution story, in nutshell, is that on 15.10.2022 at 3.00 p.m. applicant alongwith her husband came to the house of the informant and Smt. Vinod Kumari, mother of the informant, was assaulted by both of them and she sustained grievous injuries in her head. F.I.R. was lodged and investigation started and now charge sheet has been submitted. From a perusal of the record it reveals that the applicant was cooperative during course of investigation. No custodial interrogation is required in the matter.

¶12

In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1 , the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the controversy finally by holding the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.

¶13

It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial.

¶14

It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

¶15

Considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till the end of trial.

¶16

The application is allowed accordingly.

¶17

In the event of arrest of the applicant, she shall be released on anticipatory bail on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶18

(i) The applicant shall make herself available before the Court concerned on the date fixed in the matter and will cooperate in the trial.

¶19

(ii) 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/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office.

¶20

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if she has passport, the same shall be deposited by her before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

¶21

In case of default of any of the conditions, the same may be a ground for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant.

¶22

Order Date :- 2.8.2023

¶23

safi

¶24

Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Long Sri v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Long Sri v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Ram Sharan and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suraj Harijan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Riyazuddin Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nagelal Sonkar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Gajla Devi Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.