Ishrat Jahan @ Chaudhary @ Ishrat Chaudhary Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1339 of 2024

¶3

Ishrat Jahan @ Chaudhary @ Ishrat Chaudhary

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Zia Ul Qayuim, Ajeet Pratap Singh, Anand Dwivedi, Apoorv Dev, Prashant Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Jagrit Sharma

¶7

Court No. - 15

¶8

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶9

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the respondent State and learned counsel for the complainant.

¶10

The applicant has moved the present application praying for grant of anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.171/2024 under sections 420, 120-B, 467, 468, 471, 504 I.P.C., Police Station- Gazipur, District Lucknow.

¶11

This Court while giving interim protection has passed the following order on 19.6.2024:-

¶12

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

¶13

2. The present application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. has been filed for anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.171/2024 under sections 420, 120-B, 467, 468, 471, 504 I.P.C., Police Station- Gazipur, District Lucknow.

¶14

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that it is an undisputed fact that the husband of the applicant was running a furniture show room over the property in question. During the COVID-19 pandemic, he died, thereafter, private respondent was trying to evict the applicant from the said property who is now managing the show room. As a result, Regular Suit No.133/2024; Smt. Ishrat Jahan @ Chaudhary Vs. Shri Narayan Das Jotvani and Anr. was filed on 16.01.2024, thereafter, commission was ordered by the trial court and the same was conducted by the Commissioner concerned on 12.04.2024 and when this fact came into the notice of the private respondent, then on the basis of concocted facts,

¶15

ABAIL No. 1339 of 2024

¶16

2

¶17

F.I.R. was lodged on 27.04.2024 under Sections 120B, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 504 I.P.C. only with the intention to make pressure on the applicant. He further submitted that the applicant is a widow lady and is ready to cooperate in the investigation, therefore, the interim anticipatory bail may be granted to her.

¶18

4. Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of applicant but he did not dispute this fact that one civil suit is pending between the parties since January, 2024.

¶19

5. Considering the argument of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the FIR, plaint of the Civil Suit No.133/2024 as well as other relevant documents, it is evident from the record that commission was conducted in compliance of the directions of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Havali, Lucknow on 12.4.2024, thereafter, F.I.R. of case in question was lodged on 27.04.2024 and there is property dispute in between the parties, therefore, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled for interim anticipatory bail.

¶20

6. Till the next date of listing, in the event of arrest of the applicant, namely, Ishrat Jahan @ Chaudhary @ Ishrat Chaudhary in the aforesaid case, she shall be released forthwith by the Station House Officer of the police station concerned, on her furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/with the following condition:-

¶21

(i) That the accused-applicant shall make themselves available for interrogation by police authorities as and when required and will cooperate with the investigation;

¶22

(ii) That the accused-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 her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer; and

¶23

(iii) That the accused-applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

¶24

7. However, it is directed that the applicant will join and participate in each and every aspect of Investigation and will lend full assistance to the Investigating Agency, even with regard to 'discovery of fact' if and when required so by the Investigating Agency.

¶25

8. Issue notice to the private respondent returnable at an early date.

¶26

9. List this case on 20.08.2024 for final disposal.

¶27

10. In the meantime, learned A.G.A. may file counter affidavit."

¶28

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in compliance of order extracted above, the applicant has filed bonds. Charge-sheet has been filed. Cognizance has been taken. The applicant has cooperated in the investigation and has also cooperating in the ongoing trial and not misused the liberty of interim anticipatory bail. It is submitted that the applicant

¶29

ABAIL No. 1339 of 2024

¶30

3

¶31

undertakes to cooperate in the trial.

¶32

Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail prayer. Learned A.G.A. does not dispute that the applicant is not cooperating in the trial.

¶33

Considering the interim protection granted vide order extracted above which has not been misused by the applicant, undertaking that the applicant shall cooperate in the trial, and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I am of the opinion that the interim protection granted earlier is liable to be and is hereby made absolute .

¶34

The application is allowed accordingly.

¶35

October 29, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S

¶36

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶37

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ishrat Jahan @ Chaudhary @ Ishrat Chaudhary v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ishrat Jahan @ Chaudhary @ Ishrat Chaudhary v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vijay Singh Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Munna @ Shoaib @ Mohammad Shoaib Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Ram Janki Mishra and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Hari Ram Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Deptt. U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Ashok Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Farki Roka Magar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.