POOJA DEVI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER
ABAIL/425/2025 · 2025-04-30
Manish Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 133785 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 133785 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:24962 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 425 of 2025 Applicant :- Pooja Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shashank Shukla,Prachi Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State. In view of
order being passed, notice to opposite party no.2 stands dispensed with. 3. This first anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.53 of 2024 under Sections 147, 452, 323, 506, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 395, 120B I.PC., P.S. Vibhuti Khand, District Lucknow. 4. As per contents of first information report in which applicant has not been nominated, the gist of allegations has been indicated against one Raj Kumar from whom the informant allegedly purchased the plot in the year 2001. It is alleged in the FIR that the said Raj Kumar sold the plot claiming it to have been bought from the Lucknow Development Authority whereas the informant came to know subsequently that the sale deed of 2001 was forgery. 5. It has been submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against her which would be evident from the fact that she is neither nominated in the FIR nor is their any allegation levelled against her. The gist of allegations connected with applicant were in fact with regard her husband who is said to have introduced the informant with the said Raj Kumar and her name has allegedly surfaced during the course of statement of applicant's husband Mukesh Kumar @ Rakesh Yadav. It is submitted that an investigation with regard to applicant is still continuing and that she does not have any previous criminal history. 6. Learned AGA has opposed the anticipatory bail application
but does not dispute the aforesaid aspects. 7. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, it appears that applicant is neither nominated in the FIR nor is their any allegation levelled against her and that after investigation he is yet continuing with only the statement of her husband having been allegedly made against her. 8. Thus, having regard to the law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Nathu Singh v. State of U.P. and Others, 2021(6) SCC 64, MANU/SC/0360/2021, protection from arrest for limited period of time i.e. till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., may be granted in favour of the applicant. 9.
In result, the anticipatory bail application moved by the applicant- Pooja Devi is finally disposed of with a direction that till the submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., in the event of arrest of applicant in the above- mentioned case, he shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/ Investigating Officer subject to the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation or even for discovery of any fact by a police officer as and when required; (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; (3) The applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court.
10. In case of default of any condition the investigating officer may approach this Court for cancellation/modification of this
order.
Order Date :- 30.4.2025 Satish Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench