9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 1239X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, such application is rejected. Learned Senior Advocate has drawn attention of this Court towards Annexure no. 3 which is an order dated 7.9.2018 passed by the Apex Court in CRLMP No. 126050 of 2010 in Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 177 of 2018 (Kusum Lata vs. Union of India & Ors.), which reads as under : "SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO. 3926 OF 2018 Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner states that a Writ Petition has been filed in this Court challenging the vires of Rule 18(3) of the Allahabad High C Court Rules, 1952. Accordingly, we dispose of the present Special Leave Petition in terms of our interim order dated 04.05.2018 granting bail, which will continue till the disposal of the aforesaid writ petition. CRLMP NO. 126050/2018 IN WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 177 OF 2018: A coordinate Bench of this Court has, in the case of relatives this petitioner, passed an order dated 11.07.2018. In terms of the said order, we allow the petitioner before us to appear before the Trial Court within two weeks from today. The petitioner shall then be at liberty to file a bail application, which will be considered by the Trial Court forthwith. Even if the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8. The order dated 19.4.2018 passed by the Apex Court is quoted hereinbelow:- "Upon hearing the counsel the Court made the following order. The High Court has dismissed the bail application preferred by the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners have not been taken into custody and in the absence thereof, the application under section 439 Cr.P.C. would not be maintainable. Because of the aforesaid reason, the High Court has not gone into the merits of the application for bail submitted by the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn our attention to the application dated 15.3.2018 filed by the petitioners seeking bail. Paragraph 9 thereof reads as under:- 9. That, all the three applicants above named are present today, i.e., 15.3.2018 before this Hon'ble Court in terms of the order dated 14.3.2018 passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the common WP (Crl.) 59 of 2018 preferred by them under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. It is clear from the above that there was a specific averment made in the applicant that the petitioners were present in the Court in terms of order dated 14.3.2018 passed by this Court. Therefore, it was permi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... file supplementary affidavit and serve a copy of the same to learned counsel for the Union of India forthwith, who shall file a detailed counter affidavit by the next date fixed to the present bail application as well as to the supplementary affidavit to be filed by the learned counsel for the applicant. Let the matter be listed on 19th November, 2018. Taking into account that the applicant is an old lady and is suffering from various old age disease, we grant her interim bail at this stage with a direction that she shall remain present before this Court on the next date fixed. Let the applicant, namely, Kusum Lata involved in Complaint Case No. 13 of 2017 arising out of ECIR/04/PMLA/LKZO/2015 dated 08.10.2015 under sections 3 read with 4 Prevention of Money Launderng Act, 2003 registered with Enforcement Directorate, Lucknow be released on interim bail on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 5 lacs with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Special Court, Lucknow. The applicant is directed to co-operate with the trial which is said to be going on before the trial court concerned failing which interim bail granted to her shall automatically s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e matters have appeared on the Board today. Today again, a letter is circulated seeking adjournment on the same ground of "personal difficulty" of the instructing counsel. Taking note of the subject-matter. the past proceedings, and the observations occurring in the impugned order, we have declined the prayer for adjournment. After having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the material placed on record, we are unable to find any infirmity in the impugned order dated 18.12.2018, whereby the High Court declined the prayer of pre-arrest bail of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the other accused persons in these matters have been granted bail different occasions. On being queried if any of the principal accused person had been granted the concession of pre-arrest bail in these matters, inter alia, involving the offences under Sections 1/4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, the learned counsel for the petitioner frankly answered in the negative. In any case, so far the impugned orders are concerned, we are satisfied that the High Court has rightly declined the prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner, par ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sel. In para 19 of the application the ailment of the present applicant has been indicated enclosing therewith the relevant medical documents. For the convenience para 19 of the writ petition is being reproduced herein below : "19. That Ld. Judge did not consider the fact applicant participated in the investigation throughout and was never arrested. She is house wife, aged about 39 years suffering from multiple life threatening disease as her one infected kidney was removed in the year 2012 by surgery and she is having history of Arthritis, hyper tension, acute vertigo, acute urinary tract infection, nausea, reduced appetite and depression with panic attacks and remains under regular supervision and medical check up. She remained hospitalized from 06.06.2016 to 09.06.2016 due to severe depression and in the year 2017 she was admitted to NEO Hospital Noida from 10.08.2017 to 11.08.2017 and was diagnosed with acute vertigo and some other ailments which has been mentioned above. It is pertinent to mention here that applicant is not evading the trial proceedings instead she appeared before the Ld. Trial Court in compliance of the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court, however she could ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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. It is further provided that the learned counsel for the applicant shall supply the advance copy of the bail application to the learned counsel for the opposite parties by 30.1.2023, so that the learned counsel for the opposite parties may seek instructions and may file objection, if so needed. Till her appearance before the learned trial court in terms of this order or a period of one week from today i.e. on or before 1.2.2023, whichever is earlier no coercive action shall be taken against the present applicant. However, it is made clear that if the present applicant does not appear before the learned trial court within time stipulated, the benefit of this order shall not be available to her and the prosecution / investigating agency / trial court would be at liberty to take appropriate coercive steps against her strictly in accordance with law. In view of the aforesaid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
