Allowed

Smt. Premwati v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Sept 2023ABAIL/9728/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by Smt. Premwati. Relying on Sushila Aggarwal, the court observed the case appears civil in nature and the applicant was cooperative. Bail was granted till the end of trial with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till end of trial with a bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and standard affidavits.

Smt. Premwati Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:186459

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9728 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Smt. Premwati Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar Agarwal,Radha Krishan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ramesh Kumar Tiwari,Tiwari Abhishek Rajesh

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant and perused the material available on record.

¶7

This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by applicant - Smt. Premwati seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 312 of 2021, under Sections 420, 120-B IPC, Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Mathura.

¶8

It is alleged in the F.I.R. that Smt. Bhagwan Devi, wife of the informant and the accused applicant Premwati are the joint owners of plot no. 28 and both have half - half share in the aforesaid plot. Accused applicant Premwati, with deceitful intention and without any authority, sold the entire area of plot no. 28 whereas she had no title and right to sell the whole plot no.28.

¶9

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and she has apprehension of her arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against her. She has been falsely implicated into this matter. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. The investigation of the case has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed under Sections 420, 120-B IPC. It is further submitted that the applicant has been cooperative during the course of investigation. It is further submitted that it is an admitted fact that the applicant has half share in the plot in question and she had all the rights to dispose of her share of the said plot. Since she had a total of 1700 sq. yards of share, she had sold only 130 sq. yards of her own share. It is further submitted that although a boundary has been mentioned in the sale deed without any partition, but the area of the land remains 130 sq. yards, which has been specifically

¶10

mentioned in the impugned sale deed. It is a case of purely civil nature and an attempt has been made to give it a colour of criminal case. It is further submitted that the criminal history of the applicant has been well explained. No custodial interrogation is required in this matter from the applicant as the offences alleged against the applicant are punishable with the imprisonment for a maximum period of seven years.

¶11

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and it has been submitted that without partition of the land, a specific boundary was mentioned in the impugned sale deed, which shows the fraudulent intention of the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant has criminal antecedents of same nature of cases. After playing the fraud, the applicant has tried to grab the landed property of the informant.

¶12

The present case appears to be a case of civil nature. The applicant has been cooperative during the course of investigation. Now after submission of the charge-sheet, no custodial interrogation is required in the matter.

¶13

Although charge-sheet has been submitted in the present matter, but in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the law on the subject finally by holding that the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.

¶14

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.

¶15

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.

¶16

Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding

¶17

anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till end of the trial in the matter.

¶18

9. The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶19

In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, she shall be released on anticipatory bail till end of the trial 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 :-

¶20

(i) The applicant shall make herself available before the court concerned on the date fixed in the matter;

¶21

(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 officer;

¶22

(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.

¶23

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

¶24

Order Date :- 25.9.2023 ss

¶25

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Premwati v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Premwati 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

Smt Khushi Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Kumar Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chandra Bhooshan Singh @ Prabhuji Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rishal Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Kapinjal Yadav @Kapil Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Babu Yadav @ Baburam and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another