Neelam vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:23716

Court No. - 70

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1064 of 2025

Applicant :- Neelam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Satendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the applicant, is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Satendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant an anticipatory bail to the applicant in Case Crime No. 459 of 2020, under Sections 406, 420, 506 I.P.C, Police Station- Kishni, District- Mainpuri, till conclusion of trial.

¶9

Allegation in the first information report is that applicant persuaded the informant to provide a job and applicant took Rs. 26,00,000/- but neither job was provided nor money was returned. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Applicant is a lady. Applicant is living separately from the co-accused, Satyendra Singh, who was erstwhile husband of the applicant and she has been implicated in the present case being wife of the co-accused, Satyendra Singh. He next submitted that Investigating Officer has submitted charge-sheet in the year 2022 and applicant has no knowledge regarding summoning by the Trial Court. 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 trial proceedings.

¶10

Per contra , learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application of the applicant and submitted that the argument of applicant that applicant is living separately from the co-accused, Satyendra Singh, is not supported by any evidence as applicant has filed divorce petition in the year 2024 and claimed maintenance in

¶11

the year 2022. Applicant is named in the first information report and allegation alleged in the first information report is supported by the statements of prosecution witnesses. Moreover, applicant has not participated in the trial proceedings since last two years and deliberately avoided the trial proceedings. Hence, applicant should not be released on anticipatory bail.

¶12

Considered the submissions raised by learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record. From perusal of record, prima facie , offence is made out against the applicant. Further, applicant has not co-operated with the trial proceedings since last two years and it cannot be presumed that applicant had no knowledge regarding summons issued by the Trial Court, as such, no case for interference by this Court is made out.

¶13

Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application is rejected .

¶14

However, if the applicant surrenders before the concerned court within two weeks from today and applies for regular bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the court concerned, in accordance with law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another; reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922 .

¶15

For the period of two weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicant before the court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant.

¶16

Order Date :- 19.2.2025 Aditya

¶17

Digitally signed by :- ADITYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Neelam v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neelam v. State of U.P. and 2 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

Waseem Ahmad vs State of U.P.

Banarasi Yadav vs State of U.P.

Susendra Alias Suchendra and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Indraj and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Fujail Ahmad vs State of U.P. and Another

Jamila Khatoon and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another