Smt Shalini Saxena vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

Smt Shalini Saxena vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted to Smt. Shalini Saxena until submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., on a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to enumerated conditions, with a cancellation clause on default and a direction to the Investigating Officer to conclude the investigation preferably within three months.

Issue for consideration

Whether Smt. Shalini Saxena is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in Case Crime No. 434 of 2024 (Sections 420, 504, 506 I.P.C.), P.S. Majhola, District Moradabad. +1 more

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, and considering the nature of the accusation and the applicant's antecedents, the court held the applicant entitled to release on anticipatory bail for a limited period, applying the exception considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98.

Ratio / Principle

The applicant was ordered to be released on anticipatory bail until submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court, subject to conditions: availability for interrogation as and when required; no direct or indirect inducement, threat or promise to dissuade disclosure; and no leaving India without previous permission of the Court, with passport (if any) deposited before the concerned S.S.P./S.P.

Key takeaways

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer was left at liberty to file an appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.ratio¶16
The Investigating Officer was directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within three months from production of a certified copy of the order, independently and without being prejudiced by any observation made by this Court while deciding the anticipatory bail application.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Deepak Verma, J.; order dated 8.1.2025) allowed an anticipatory bail application under S. 438 Cr.P.C. filed by Smt. Shalini Saxena concerning Case Crime No. 434 of 2024 (Sections 420, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Majhola, District Moradabad). Without expressing any opinion on the merits and considering the nature of the accusation and the applicant's antecedents, the court granted anticipatory bail for a limited period - until submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. - relying on the exception considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98. Release was ordered on a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount, with conditions covering availability for interrogation, abstention from inducement, threat or promise, and no departure from India without prior permission (passport, if any, to be deposited with the concerned S.S.P./S.P.). On default of any condition, the Investigating Officer may seek cancellation; the Investigating Officer was further directed to conclude the investigation expeditiously, preferably within three months of production of a certified copy of the order, independently and unprejudiced by any observation in the bail order.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:3834

Court No. - 70

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10348 of 2024

Applicant :- Smt Shalini Saxena Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

This anticipatory bail application has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.434 of 2024, under Sections 420, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Majhola, District Moradabad, during pendency of trial.

Counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Instant F.I.R. is false and baseless and has been lodged with malicious intention as informant lodged F.I.R. in the year 2019 against the applicant. The investigation is going on. The applicant has no criminal history. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicant is apprehensive of imminent arrest. In case, the applicant is released on bail, she would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the investigation.

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant with the contention that the applicant is not entitled for anticipatory bail as prima facie case is made out. The apprehension of the applicant is not founded on any material on record, only on the basis of imaginary fear, the anticipatory bail cannot be granted.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case for the limited period considering the exception considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98.

Let the applicant Smt. Shalini Saxena who is involved in the aforesaid crime, be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. on furnishing a

personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions :-

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

(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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(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.

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order independently without being prejudice by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

The application stands allowed .

Order Date :- 8.1.2025 Meenu Singh

Digitally signed by :- MEENU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad