Allahabad High Court
Gauri Shankar vs State Of U.P. on 13 June, 2025
Author: Neeraj Tiwari
Bench: Neeraj Tiwari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:96707 Court No. - 49 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 4095 of 2025 Applicant :- Gauri Shankar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Srivastav,Rajesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
This anticipatory bail application (under section 482 BNSS) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 366 of 2008, under sections 448, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station- New Agra, District- Agra, during the pendency of investigation.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He further submits that a civil suit No. 688 of 2008 is pending between the parties for same property in dispute. He further submits that earlier applicants have filed a discharge application before the trial court and the trial court rejected the same by order dated 24.11.2018. He next submits that against the order dated 24.11.2018 a Criminal Revision No. 02 0f 2019 has been filed and the trial court by order dated 25.09.2020 has allowed the same and the matter was remanded back to pass a fresh order after hearing the applicant. He also submits that since then the applicant is continuously appearing on each and every date and due to his old age of 75 years he could not appear on one date. It is also submitted that dispute between the parties is civil in nature and the informant has tried to give the criminal colour to the civil litigation. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case. In case, the applicant is released on anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.
Per contra, learned AGA has also opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the said facts.
Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicants, they are directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant- Gauri Shankar involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50, 000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
(1) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation;
(2) 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and
(3) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
(4) The applicant shall surrender their passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(5) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant.
(6) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.
(7) 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. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of their bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 13.6.2025
AS