Sunaina Shukla vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:2596

Court No. - 67

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11928 of 2024

Applicant :- Sunaina Shukla Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. submits that notice of the instant application has been served upon the informant/opposite party no. 2 and opposite party no. 4/Child Welfare Committee, Kanpur on 21.05.2024. The receiving endorsements produced by the learned A.G.A. are taken on record. However, no one appears on behalf of the said opposite parties nor any counter affidavit has been filed on their behalf.

¶7

Heard counsel for the applicant, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State- opposite party and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

This application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 110 of 2024, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 354B and 506 I.P.C., Police StationKakadev, District- Kanpur Nagar.

¶9

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the First Information Report and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The victim is a major and was in relationship with the co-accused, Ankit Thakur. The first information report was lodged belatedly and the name of the applicant was subsequently disclosed in the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. As per the said statement, the informant/victim were in relationship with the named co-accused, Ankit Thakur. The allegation of rape has been made against Ankit Thakur. The only allegation against the applicant is that he was in connivance with the named co-accused and had threatened and assaulted the victim. It is next contended that the named coaccused, Ankit Thakur, has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 04.10.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 30205 of 2024 (Ankit Thakur alias Faiz Malik vs. State of U.P. and 3 others). The applicant is a lady and has no criminal antecedents. The investigation is still pending in the

¶10

instant case. It is next submitted that the applicant has apprehension of her arrest and in case, the applicant is released on anticipatory bail, she will not misuse the said liberty.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶12

Counsel for the applicant further submits that the application for grant of anticipatory bail be confined only till the submission of police report.

¶13

Having regard to the submissions made by counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicant and the fact that the applicant was not named in the First Information Report, the fact that F.I.R. was lodged belatedly, the fact that the co-accused, Ankit Thakur, has been granted regular bail by this Court. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report.

¶14

In the event of arrest, the applicant- Sunaina Shukla be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶15

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

¶16

(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;

¶17

(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.

¶18

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.

¶19

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the

¶20

investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudiced by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶21

The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

¶22

The application stands disposed of.

¶23

Order Date :- 7.1.2025 Sachin Mishra

¶24

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sunaina Shukla v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunaina Shukla v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rajman Rajbhar and Another vs State of U.P.

Shahnawaz vs State of U.P.

Dharmendra Singh vs State of U.P.

Shilpi Singh vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Vibhuti Prakash Alias Vibhuti Prakash Sahu vs State of U.P. and Another

Archana Sharma vs State of U.P. and 3 Others