Smt. Rajju Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11396

¶2

Court No. - 30

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2163 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Smt. Rajju Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Kailash Nath Mishra,Vineet Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashvani Kumar Yadav,Indra Pratap Singh

¶6

Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.

¶7

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

¶8

This application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Smt. Rajju for anticipatory bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.270 of 2024, under Sections 323, 308, 504 and 506 IPC lodged at Police Station Tarabganj, District Gonda.

¶9

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that applicant is a married lady and she has a four year old baby girl. She has falsely been implicated in this case. According to the prosecution story, on 29.05.2024, four accused persons including the present applicant have assaulted the informant with lathi and when Vishnu and Vandana ran to rescue, they have also been beaten by the accused persons with lathi and threatened for life. Charge sheet has been filed without making the arrest of the applicant, which shows the applicant has cooperated in the investigation. There are general allegations of causing injury to three injured persons have been levelled against all the four accused persons. The story of the prosecution is doubtful as it is specifically mentioned in para 15 of the bail application that applicant is pregnant and in view of her peculiar condition, she could not have participated in the fight. He further submits that the applicant was granted interim

¶10

protection from arrest vide order dated 20.09.2024 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court, subject to certain conditions and one of the conditions imposed was that the applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each date fixed unless personal present is exempted. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is appearing before the trial Court and is cooperating in the trial.The applicant is not having any criminal history and, thus, protection from arrest be granted to her.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the submission made on behalf of the applicant that the applicant is appearing before the trial court and is cooperating in the trial.

¶12

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that the interim protection from arrest was granted by the coordinate Bench of this Court in favour of the applicant 20.09.2024. Charge sheet has also been filed without making arrest of the applicant, which clearly shows that she has cooperated in the investigation. Nothing has been brought in the knowledge of this Court by the State which may refute the claim of the applicant of being cooperating in the investigation/ trial.

¶13

Thus, the interim protection from arrest granted vide order dated 20.09.2024 by the Coordinate Bench of this Court is made absolute and, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the applicant, involved in the above-mentioned crime, under the process of the Court or on his appearance before the trial court within 20 days from today i.e. 14.03.2025, whichever is earlier, she shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, subject to the following conditions:

¶14

(i). The applicant, if not arrested earlier, shall appear before the trial court within 20 days from today and cooperate in the trial and shall not seek any adjournment when the prosecution witness would be in attendance.

¶15

(ii). In case of further investigation or re-investigation the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and make himself available as and when required by the Investigating officer of the case, even for the recovery of any fact.

¶16

(iii). The applicant shall not make any attempt to influence the prosecution witnesses and will also not commit any crime during his release on anticipatory bail.

¶17

(iv). The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and specially when the prosecution witnesses are present in court.

¶18

(v). The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶19

If in the opinion of the trial court default of any of the condition placed above is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and shall proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

It is clarified that all the observations contained in this order are only for disposal of this anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial proceedings in any manner.

¶21

This anticipatory bail application is allowed accordingly.

¶22

Order Date :- 21.2.2025

¶23

G. Singh/-

¶24

Digitally signed by :- GURPREET SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt. Rajju v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Rajju 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

Tribhuwan Nath Jayaswal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Mujeeb vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Vivek Vishwas and Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Smt. Santosh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P. and Another

Mujeeb Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Ram Aher and Another Vs Staet of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another