Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
Samit Gopal, J.
Indu Devi - Applicant
Versus
State of
CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 503 of 2025
Decided On :
(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 438 - Anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant seeking protection against arrest during trial. The applicant is the mother of a co-accused and has been implicated in a case under Sections 363 and 366 IPC. The victim is a major girl as per medical report. The first anticipatory bail application was dismissed for want of prosecution. The court finds the applicant entitled to bail considering the nature of accusation and the circumstances of the case. (Paras 3, 8, 9, 10)
(B) Anticipatory Bail - The court grants anticipatory bail subject to conditions, including appearance before the court and non-inducement of witnesses. The order is conditional upon the applicant's cooperation in trial proceedings. (Paras 10, 11)
Facts of the case:
The applicant, Indu Devi, seeks anticipatory bail in connection with a case filed under IPC sections concerning the alleged abduction of a major girl. The charge sheet has been submitted, and the applicant claims false implication due to familial ties with a co-accused. (Paras 3, 6)
Findings of Court:
The court finds that the nature of accusations and the fact that the victim is a major girl justify the granting of anticipatory bail to the applicant. (Paras 8, 9)
Issues: The main issues addressed include the applicant's implication in the case, the status of the victim, and the procedural history of prior bail applications. (Paras 6, 8)
Ratio Decidendi: The court holds that the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail given her familial relationship to a co-accused and the medical report confirming the victim's age, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. (Paras 9, 10)
Result: The anticipatory bail application is disposed of, granting bail to the applicant.
JUDGMENT :
Samit Gopal, J.
1. List revised.
2. Heard Sri Juned Alam, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ram Prakash Shukla, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.
3. The anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Indu Devi, seeking anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest during trial in Special Session No. 73 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 279 of 2016, under Sections 363, 366 IPC, Police Station Barhaj, District Deoria during trial.
4. Prior notice of this anticipatory bail application was served in the office of the learned Government Advocate, High Court, Allahabad and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020 - Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P. this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned State counsel as per Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. (U.P. Amendment) is not required since learned counsel for the State informs the Court that he has received the required instructions in the matter.
5. This is a second anticipatory bail application. The first anticipatory bail application on behalf of the applicant was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 4.10.2024 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C.No.6664 of 2024 (Indu Devi Vs. State of U.P.).
6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant has been summoned under Sections 363, 366 IPC. The investigation has concluded and charge sheet has been submitted in the matter against the applicant and other co-accused.It is submitted that the applicant has been implicated because she is mother of co-accused Arjun. It is further submitted that the victim is a major girl as she was opined for about 18 years by the CMO concerned in its report dated 29.11.2016. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 37 of the affidavit. It is further submitted that the applicant and three other co-accused have filed Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.5380 of 2017 for quashing of the FIR in which an order of no coercive action was passed by a Division Bench of this Court on 11.4.2017, copy of the said order is annexed as annexure no.6 to the affidavit filed in support of anticipatory bail application. It is further submitted that co-accused Mridula Dubey @ Sunita has been granted anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial by order dated 27.11.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.6903 of 2024 (Mridula Dubey @ Sunita Vs. State of U.P.), copy of the said order produced by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
8. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is the mother of co- accused Arjun. Co-accused has been granted anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial. The victim is a major girl as per medical report of CMO concerned. Charge sheet has been submitted in the matter. 9. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the nature of accusation, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.
10. In the event of arrest of the applicant Indu Devi, involved in the aforesaid case crime, she shall be released on anticipatory bail till period of trial on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) the applicant shall appear before the court concerned within a period of two weeks from today and file certified copy of this order for its compliance.
(ii) the applicant shall make h
Anticipatory bail can be granted when the nature of accusation and circumstances, including the victim's status, justify such relief.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of innocence, lack of criminal history, and willingness to participate in the investigation in granting anticipatory bail in seri....
Anticipatory bail is granted when allegations lack substantial evidence, emphasizing cooperation with the investigation and compliance with court conditions.
The court may grant anticipatory bail based on the nature of allegations and the circumstances of the case, including the status of co-accused.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that anticipatory bail can continue till the end of the trial, as per the law laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in the case of ....
The court granted anticipatory bail based on the prosecutrix's voluntary actions, emphasizing the importance of her being a major in the decision.
Point of Law : while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
