9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 1239X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the present applicant which has been indicated in the application and such critical physical condition has been considered by this Court in earlier occasion and by the Apex Court, therefore, liberty is given to the present applicant to appear before the learned trial court within one week from today. To be more precise on or before 1.2.2023 and file her bail application. The said bail application shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously preferably on the same date, if possible. Application disposed off. - Application U/S 482 No. - 662 of 2023 - - - Dated:- 25-1-2023 - Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J. For the Applicant : Pranjal Krishna, Counsel For the Opposite Party :- Kuldeep Srivastava,Shiv P. Shukla, Counsel. ORDER HON'BLE RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN,J. Heard Sri Satish Chandra Mishra, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Pranjal Krishna, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shiv P. Shukla, learned counsel for the Union of India and Sri Kuldeep Srivastava, learned counsel for the Enforcement Directorate. By means of this application filed u/s 482 Cr.P.C. the learned counsel for the applicant has assailed the order dated 16.1.2023 passed by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... who is wife of main accused Yadav Singh was directed to surrender before the court below concerned. He submits that in pursuance of the said order of the Apex Court, the applicant surrendered before the court below on 15.9.2018 and moved a bail application which was rejected by the Special Court, Lucknow on the same day but there was an order of the Apex Court giving liberty to the applicant to approach the higher forum and in the meanwhile for a period of 30 days she shall not be arrested. He further submits that though the said period expired but the applicant moved a time extension application before the Apex Court and the Apex Court on 11.10.2018 has extended the interim protection given to her vide order dated 7.9.2018 for a period of further 30 days copy of which has been produced by learned counsel for the applicant which is taken on record. He has further drawn the attention of the Court regarding that the applicant be taken into custody in pursuance of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sandeep Kumar Bafna vs. State of Maharashtra and another reported in (2014) 16 SCC 623. He submits that earlier when co-accused persons, who are daughter and son of the applicant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tions stand disposed of. Hence, the applicant Kusum Lata, who has been identified by her counsel Sri Om Prakash Tripathi, has surrendered before this Court and is taken into custody. Learned counsel for the applicant prays that taking into account her old age and ailments as she is suffering from various disease and kidney has been transplanted as has been mentioned in paras-4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, the applicant may be released on interim bail by this Court for which she is ready to abide by any condition imposed by this Court. He further undertakes that the applicant will cooperate with the trial which is said to be going before the trial court concerned. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Union of India could not dispute the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant with respect to the order passed by the Apex Court 7.9.2018 as well as 19.4.2018 for hearing the bail application of the applicant. He submits that from a perusal of the bail application it is apparent that only medical ground has been taken for being considered for grant of bail to the applicant and there appears to be no averment made with respect to the merits of the case to which lea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the accompanying affidavit and submit a report to this Court by the next date fixed. The Registrar General is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial court concerned forthwith for compliance/necessary information and further send a certified copy of this order to the Director General, Health U.P., who shall ensure that the report regarding the ailment of the applicant be submitted by the C.M.O. Ghaziabad before this Court by the next date fixed. However, the aforesaid petition has been rejected vide order dated 18.12.2018 giving liberty to the present applicant to avail the remedy before the appropriate forum till 10.1.2019 making clear that if she does not surrender before the learned trial court on or before 10.1.2019 the benefit of this order shall not be provided to her. Annexure no. 7 is an order dated 10.1.2019 passed by the Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 322 -325/2019 (Kusum Lata vs. Central Bureau of Investigation) granting interim protection to the petitioner till the next date of listing. Further, vide order dated 7.12.2020 the Apex Court has passed the following order : In these matters, the petitioner was grante ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner is considered by the Trial Court, whichever be the earlier. It goes without saying that we have not commented on the merits of the case either way and all the aspects remain open for consideration by the Court concerned in accordance with law. Subject to the observations foregoing, these petitions stand dismissed. All pending applications also stand disposed of. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed modification application of the order dated 7.12.2022 and the Apex Court vide order dated 16.12.2022 (Annexure no. 9) clarified the order and in place of 'surrender' before the learned trial court the Apex Court has directed that if the petitioner 'appears' before the learned trial court within four weeks from today and applies for regular bail her bail plea may be considered by the learned trial court expeditiously. As per learned Senior Advocate the aforesaid period of four weeks (28 days) was expiring on 13.1.2023 and on that date the present applicant has filed her bail application before the learned trial court. Learned trial court by means of order dated 16.1.2023 rejected the bail application of the present applicant. Learne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ible. Per contra, Sri Shiv P. Shukla, learned counsel for the Union of India and Sri Kuldeep Srivastava, learned counsel for the Enforcement Directorate has stated that the present applicant has never appeared before the Court concerned from the very beginning and on the basis of protection being given to her by the Apex Court she avoided her appearance. Both the aforesaid counsel for the opposite parties have stated that there is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order dated 16.1.2023 inasmuch as the impugned order is absolutely in the conformity of the settled proposition of law. Therefore, she is not entitled for any relief. Be that as it may, considering the fact that the liberty of the present applicant has been protected by the Apex Court till 13.1.2023 as considered above, therefore, her non-appearance before the learned trial court on or before 13.1.2023 would not be considered as an illegality on her part. Further, when she filed her application for bail before the learned trial court on 13.1.2023 she should have appeared before the learned trial court inasmuch as if the applicant does not appear before the learned trial court in the present case, her bail a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
