State of U.P v. Party

2. Heard counsel for the applicants, counsel for the complainant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State. Perused the material on record.

3. The applicants were granted interim anticipatory bail vide order dated

7.3.2025 passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The order is quoted herein below:- "1. Heard Shri Ramesh Prajapati, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant an anticipatory bail to the applicants in Criminal Complaint No. 09 of 2024 under Sections 323, 452, 392 I.P.C., Police Station-Rampura, District-Jalaun at Urai. 3. Allegation in the F.I.R. is that complainant i.e. son-in-law of the applicant no. 1 has some matrimonial issues with his wife, therefore, implicated entire family members. Daughter of the applicant no. 1 and wife of the complainant has initiated proceedings against the complainant under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act and under Sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(2) of BNS and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Instant complaint has been registered in counter. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. In case, applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they would not misuse the liberty of bail and would co-operate with the investigation. Applicants have definite apprehension of their arrest by the police. 4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicants with the contention that the applicants are not entitled for anticipatory bail as prima facie case is made out. 5. Learned A.G.A. granted four week's time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter. 6. List this case after six weeks. 7. As an interim protection, till the next date of listing fixed for hearing on this 2 NABAIL No. 1056 of 2025 application, the applicants are granted anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number/ complaint case. In the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required; (ii) The applicants 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court S.S.P./S.P./C.P./A.C.P concerned. (iv) The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (v) The applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. (vi) The applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted. 8. Investigating Officer/Govt. In default of any of Advocate/concerned court is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants." the same shall be deposited before if applicants have passport, the conditions,

4. Thereafter, on 5.4.2025 following order was passed on the correction application :- "1. This is an application for correction of the order dated 07.03.2025 passed by this Court.

2. The correction application stands allowed.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants states that in the 7th line of 7th para of the order dated 07.03.2025, the sentence "to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned" has been wrongly transcribed in place of "to the satisfaction of court concerned."

4. Para-7 of the order dated 07.03.2025 is corrected by modifying "applicant shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned".

5. The condition given in Para-7(i) is deleted and in its place following condition shall be read:- "The applicant shall appear each and every date fixed by the court concerned. In failure, interim order granted by this Court shall deem to be vacated."

6. This order shall be treated as part of the order dated 07.03.2025.

7. A certified copy of this order shall be issued along with copy of order dated 07.03.2025."

5. Counsel for the applicants contends that applicant no.1 is mother-in-law, applicant no.2 is father-in-law and applicant nos.3, 4 and 5 are brothers-in- law of the complainant and applicant no.6 is close relative of applicant no.1. Earlier, the daughter of applicant no.2, who is the wife of the complainant, had lodged a complaint under Section 12 of the Domestic Violation Act, 2005 (Smt. Arti Devi and another vs. Awadh Bihari and others) against the complainant and his family members. The daughter of applicant no.2 also lodged a complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the complainant and his family members, registered as Complaint Case No.2837 of 2024 3 NABAIL No. 1056 of 2025 (Smt. Arti vs. Awadh Bihari and others). In both the said cases, notices have been issued to the complainant and the proceedings are pending before the courts concerned. It is contended that as a counterblast to the said proceedings, the present prosecution has been instituted. No such incident, as alleged has occurred. The applicants have not committed any robbery. At this stage there is no credible evidence to link the applicants with the offence. Further, pursuant to interim order dated 7.3.2025 corrected on

5.4.2025, the applicants had furnished bail bonds before the court concerned and are appearing before the court on the dates fixed. The applicants have not violated any conditions or misused the liberty of interim anticipatory bail. Criminal history of the applicant nos.1, 2 and 3 has been explained in para no.2 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicant nos.4, 5 and 6 have no criminal antecedents. In case, the applicants are granted anticipatory bail, till the conclusion of trial they will not misuse the said liberty.

6. Learned A.G.A. and counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

7. Having regard to the submissions made, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicants, and the fact that earlier, the daughter of applicant no.2, who is the wife of the complainant, had lodged a complaint under Section 12 of the Domestic Violation Act, 2005 (Smt. Arti Devi and another vs. Awadh Bihari and others) against the complainant and his family members; The daughter of applicant no.2 also lodged a complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the complainant and his family members, registered as Complaint Case No.2837 of 2024 (Smt. Arti vs. Awadh Bihari and others); at this stage there is no substantive evidence to link the applicants with the offence. Further, pursuant to interim order dated

7.3.2025 corrected on 5.4.2025, the applicants are appearing before the court concerned on the dates fixed. No violation of conditions or misuse of liberty of interim anticipatory bail has been pointed out by learned AGA, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled for anticipatory bail.

8. In the event of arrest, the applicants Smt. Vimlesh, Ramdarshan, Chandrasen, Mangal, Dileep and Dinesh Prajapati, involved in Criminal Complaint No. 09 of 2024 under Sections 323, 452, 392 I.P.C., Police Station-Rampura, District-Jalaun at Urai, be released on anticipatory bail 4 NABAIL No. 1056 of 2025 during pendency of trial, on furnishing a fresh 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 applicants shall make themselves available on each date fixed in the matter by the court concerned; (ii) the applicants 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court; (iii) the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passports, the same shall be deposited by them before the concerned court.

9. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.

10. The application stands disposed of. September 19, 2025 Manish Kr (Vivek Varma,J.) MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Heard counsel for the applicants, counsel for the complainant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State. Perused the material on record.

3. The applicants were granted interim anticipatory bail vide order dated

7.3.2025 passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The order is quoted herein below:- "1. Heard Shri Ramesh Prajapati, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant an anticipatory bail to the applicants in Criminal Complaint No. 09 of 2024 under Sections 323, 452, 392 I.P.C., Police Station-Rampura, District-Jalaun at Urai. 3. Allegation in the F.I.R. is that complainant i.e. son-in-law of the applicant no. 1 has some matrimonial issues with his wife, therefore, implicated entire family members. Daughter of the applicant no. 1 and wife of the complainant has initiated proceedings against the complainant under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act and under Sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(2) of BNS and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Instant complaint has been registered in counter. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. In case, applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they would not misuse the liberty of bail and would co-operate with the investigation. Applicants have definite apprehension of their arrest by the police. 4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicants with the contention that the applicants are not entitled for anticipatory bail as prima facie case is made out. 5. Learned A.G.A. granted four week's time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter. 6. List this case after six weeks. 7. As an interim protection, till the next date of listing fixed for hearing on this 2 NABAIL No. 1056 of 2025 application, the applicants are granted anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number/ complaint case. In the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required; (ii) The applicants 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court S.S.P./S.P./C.P./A.C.P concerned. (iv) The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (v) The applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. (vi) The applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted. 8. Investigating Officer/Govt. In default of any of Advocate/concerned court is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants." the same shall be deposited before if applicants have passport, the conditions,

4. Thereafter, on 5.4.2025 following order was passed on the correction application :- "1. This is an application for correction of the order dated 07.03.2025 passed by this Court.

2. The correction application stands allowed.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants states that in the 7th line of 7th para of the order dated 07.03.2025, the sentence "to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned" has been wrongly transcribed in place of "to the satisfaction of court concerned."

4. Para-7 of the order dated 07.03.2025 is corrected by modifying "applicant shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned".

5. The condition given in Para-7(i) is deleted and in its place following condition shall be read:- "The applicant shall appear each and every date fixed by the court concerned. In failure, interim order granted by this Court shall deem to be vacated."

6. This order shall be treated as part of the order dated 07.03.2025.

7. A certified copy of this order shall be issued along with copy of order dated 07.03.2025."

5. Counsel for the applicants contends that applicant no.1 is mother-in-law, applicant no.2 is father-in-law and applicant nos.3, 4 and 5 are brothers-in- law of the complainant and applicant no.6 is close relative of applicant no.1. Earlier, the daughter of applicant no.2, who is the wife of the complainant, had lodged a complaint under Section 12 of the Domestic Violation Act, 2005 (Smt. Arti Devi and another vs. Awadh Bihari and others) against the complainant and his family members. The daughter of applicant no.2 also lodged a complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the complainant and his family members, registered as Complaint Case No.2837 of 2024 3 NABAIL No. 1056 of 2025 (Smt. Arti vs. Awadh Bihari and others). In both the said cases, notices have been issued to the complainant and the proceedings are pending before the courts concerned. It is contended that as a counterblast to the said proceedings, the present prosecution has been instituted. No such incident, as alleged has occurred. The applicants have not committed any robbery. At this stage there is no credible evidence to link the applicants with the offence. Further, pursuant to interim order dated 7.3.2025 corrected on

5.4.2025, the applicants had furnished bail bonds before the court concerned and are appearing before the court on the dates fixed. The applicants have not violated any conditions or misused the liberty of interim anticipatory bail. Criminal history of the applicant nos.1, 2 and 3 has been explained in para no.2 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicant nos.4, 5 and 6 have no criminal antecedents. In case, the applicants are granted anticipatory bail, till the conclusion of trial they will not misuse the said liberty.

6. Learned A.G.A. and counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

7. Having regard to the submissions made, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicants, and the fact that earlier, the daughter of applicant no.2, who is the wife of the complainant, had lodged a complaint under Section 12 of the Domestic Violation Act, 2005 (Smt. Arti Devi and another vs. Awadh Bihari and others) against the complainant and his family members; The daughter of applicant no.2 also lodged a complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the complainant and his family members, registered as Complaint Case No.2837 of 2024 (Smt. Arti vs. Awadh Bihari and others); at this stage there is no substantive evidence to link the applicants with the offence. Further, pursuant to interim order dated

7.3.2025 corrected on 5.4.2025, the applicants are appearing before the court concerned on the dates fixed. No violation of conditions or misuse of liberty of interim anticipatory bail has been pointed out by learned AGA, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled for anticipatory bail.

8. In the event of arrest, the applicants Smt. Vimlesh, Ramdarshan, Chandrasen, Mangal, Dileep and Dinesh Prajapati, involved in Criminal Complaint No. 09 of 2024 under Sections 323, 452, 392 I.P.C., Police Station-Rampura, District-Jalaun at Urai, be released on anticipatory bail 4 NABAIL No. 1056 of 2025 during pendency of trial, on furnishing a fresh 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 applicants shall make themselves available on each date fixed in the matter by the court concerned; (ii) the applicants 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court; (iii) the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passports, the same shall be deposited by them before the concerned court.

9. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.

10. The application stands disposed of. September 19, 2025 Manish Kr (Vivek Varma,J.) MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad