Raghvendra Singh & others v. State of U.P. & another) is pending consideration before this Court wherein the

"1. Heard Sri Aman Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Vivek Gupta, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

2. Issue notice to opposite party no. 2 returnable at an early date.

3. Steps within a week.

4. Office to proceed accordingly.

5. By means of present anticipatory bail application, the applicants have shown their apprehension of arrest in Case Crime No. 186 of 2020 u/s 498A, 304B IPC & section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Umri Begumganj, District Gonda. It has been submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case as they have not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.

6. The present applicants are the family members of the husband of the deceased, therefore, they have been implicated on the basis of false allegations. During investigation the I.O. has not found any incriminating material against the petitioners, therefore, the Final Report has been filed in their favour and that final report has not been protested by the informant. However, during trial application u/s 319 Cr.P.C. was filed by the informant where the present applicants have been summoned. The applicant no. 1 is brother-in-law (Jeth), applicant no. 2 is Sister-in-law (Jethani) and applicant no. 3 is mother in law (Saas). Learned counsel has stated that against the order being passed u/s 319 Cr.P.C. one criminal revision bearing Criminal Revision No. 1035 of 2024 (Raghvendra Singh & others vs. State of U.P. & another) is pending consideration before this Court wherein the notice has been issued. Learned counsel has stated that the present applicants are ready to participate in the trial proceedings but their liberty may be protected as Non-Bailable Warrant has been issued against them.

7. Learned counsel has further submitted that the present applicantss have earlier participated in the investigation and on their proper cooperation in the investigation the Final Report was filed. They never flouted the process of law, therefore, in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98 their liberty may be protected as Non-Bailable Warrant has been issued against them.

8. Learned counsel has stated that in compliance of the aforesaid order the present applicant cooperated in the investigation and charge-sheet has been filed on 9.9.2024. Learned counsel is not aware as to whether learned trial court took cognizance and issued summons or not inasmuch as no summons have been received by the applicant till date. Sri Singh has further submitted that this is a case where the F.I.R. has been lodged u/s 306 IPC and on the basis of material available on record there is no overt or positive act of the applicant to instigate or abet the victim to commit suicide, therefore, the ingredients of section 306 IPC are missing.

9. He has further submitted that the applicants are ready to cooperate in the trial proceedings in the same manner they have cooperated in the investigation, therefore, their liberty may be protected in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.

10. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer of learned counsel for the applicant but could not dispute the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant.

11. The matter requires consideration.

12. Let the counter affidavit be filed in four weeks, rejoinder affidavit may be filed in one week thereafter.

13. List in the week commencing 27.1.2025 within top ten cases.

14. Without entering into the merits of the issue and considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the undertaking of the applicants that they shall cooperate with the trial proceedings, it would be expedient in the interest of justice that the liberty of the applicants may be protected in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal (supra).

15. Therefore, it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicants shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority/ court concerned with the following conditions:- i. that 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; ii. that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; iii. that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant; iv. that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; v. that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; "

3. The learned counsel for the State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith a copy of the charge sheet and the material collected during investigation. Learned A.G.A. did not point out any violation of the conditions of interim anticipatory bail committed by the applicant. Nothing has come to light which may persuade this court to take a view, other than the view taken at the time of granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant.

4. The learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant has already furnished bail bonds.

5. In view of above, the interim order dated 16.12.2024 is made absolute and the anticipatory bail application is allowed in terms of the order dated 16.12.2024. . Order Date :- 17.4.2025 Pradeep/- (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

"1. Heard Sri Aman Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Vivek Gupta, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

2. Issue notice to opposite party no. 2 returnable at an early date.

3. Steps within a week.

4. Office to proceed accordingly.

5. By means of present anticipatory bail application, the applicants have shown their apprehension of arrest in Case Crime No. 186 of 2020 u/s 498A, 304B IPC & section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Umri Begumganj, District Gonda. It has been submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case as they have not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.

6. The present applicants are the family members of the husband of the deceased, therefore, they have been implicated on the basis of false allegations. During investigation the I.O. has not found any incriminating material against the petitioners, therefore, the Final Report has been filed in their favour and that final report has not been protested by the informant. However, during trial application u/s 319 Cr.P.C. was filed by the informant where the present applicants have been summoned. The applicant no. 1 is brother-in-law (Jeth), applicant no. 2 is Sister-in-law (Jethani) and applicant no. 3 is mother in law (Saas). Learned counsel has stated that against the order being passed u/s 319 Cr.P.C. one criminal revision bearing Criminal Revision No. 1035 of 2024 (Raghvendra Singh & others vs. State of U.P. & another) is pending consideration before this Court wherein the notice has been issued. Learned counsel has stated that the present applicants are ready to participate in the trial proceedings but their liberty may be protected as Non-Bailable Warrant has been issued against them.

7. Learned counsel has further submitted that the present applicantss have earlier participated in the investigation and on their proper cooperation in the investigation the Final Report was filed. They never flouted the process of law, therefore, in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98 their liberty may be protected as Non-Bailable Warrant has been issued against them.

8. Learned counsel has stated that in compliance of the aforesaid order the present applicant cooperated in the investigation and charge-sheet has been filed on 9.9.2024. Learned counsel is not aware as to whether learned trial court took cognizance and issued summons or not inasmuch as no summons have been received by the applicant till date. Sri Singh has further submitted that this is a case where the F.I.R. has been lodged u/s 306 IPC and on the basis of material available on record there is no overt or positive act of the applicant to instigate or abet the victim to commit suicide, therefore, the ingredients of section 306 IPC are missing.

9. He has further submitted that the applicants are ready to cooperate in the trial proceedings in the same manner they have cooperated in the investigation, therefore, their liberty may be protected in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.

10. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer of learned counsel for the applicant but could not dispute the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant.

11. The matter requires consideration.

12. Let the counter affidavit be filed in four weeks, rejoinder affidavit may be filed in one week thereafter.

13. List in the week commencing 27.1.2025 within top ten cases.

14. Without entering into the merits of the issue and considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the undertaking of the applicants that they shall cooperate with the trial proceedings, it would be expedient in the interest of justice that the liberty of the applicants may be protected in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal (supra).

15. Therefore, it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicants shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority/ court concerned with the following conditions:- i. that 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; ii. that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; iii. that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant; iv. that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; v. that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; "

3. The learned counsel for the State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith a copy of the charge sheet and the material collected during investigation. Learned A.G.A. did not point out any violation of the conditions of interim anticipatory bail committed by the applicant. Nothing has come to light which may persuade this court to take a view, other than the view taken at the time of granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant.

4. The learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant has already furnished bail bonds.

5. In view of above, the interim order dated 16.12.2024 is made absolute and the anticipatory bail application is allowed in terms of the order dated 16.12.2024. . Order Date :- 17.4.2025 Pradeep/- (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench