1 ITEM NO.6 Court 13 (Video Conferencing) SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 3262/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 12-01-2021 in CRMABA No. 8290/2020 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad) LEELAVATI DEVI @ LEELAWATI & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondent(s) IA No. 71552/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 07-10-2021 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Divyesh Pratap Singh, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Garvesh Kabra, AOR Mr. Ajay Prajapati, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R We have heard Shri Divyesh Pratap Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we see no reason to allow the application of the petitioners for anticipatory bail. However, it is observed that as and when the regular bail application is made, the same may be decided and disposed of at the earliest and preferably within a period of 48 hours from filing such an application and serving a copy of the same on the learned Public Prosecutor.
2 Before parting, we are constrained to observe that the impugned order passed by the High Court insofar as passing the order that, in case the applicants appear and surrender before the Court within 90 days and apply for bail, and till then no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants is unsustainable and contrary to the decision of this Court in the case of M/s Neeharika Infrustructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Others , 2021 (5) Scale 610. We deprecate such an order passed by the High Court. Once the High Court is of the opinion and so observed in the impugned order that the applicants are not entitled to be granted anticipatory bail and the offences alleged are made out from the allegations in the F.I.R., there was no question of granting further protection to the applicants/accused and that too for a period of 90 days and the order that no coercive action shall be taken for 90 days. Despite the judgment and order passed by this High Court in catena of decisions and, lastly, in the case of M/s Neeharika Infrustructure (supra) it is observed that many High Courts are passing such orders which are absolutely unsustainable and not tenable at law. With this, the present Special Leave Petition is disposed of. We direct the Registry to send and communicate this order to the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court so that this order can be circulated amongst all the Judges of the Allahabad High Court. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (R. NATARAJAN) (NISHA TRIPATHI) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS BRANCH OFFICER
ITEM NO.14 Court 1 (Video Conferencing) SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) Nos.3262/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 12012021 in CRMABA No. 8290/2020 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad) LEELAVATI DEVI @ LEELAWATI & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondent(s) (IA No. 55144/2021 EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT, IA No.71554/2021 EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT, IA No. 55145/2021 EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, IA No.71553/2021 EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 55141/2021 EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. & IA No. 71552/2021 PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 05072021 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY For Petitioner(s) Mr. Divyesh Pratap Singh, AOR Ms. Pratiksha Tripathi, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The Court is convened through Video Conferencing. Heard learned AdvocateonRecord appearing for the petitioners. Exemptions are allowed. Issue notice returnable in four weeks. Dasti service, in addition, is permitted.
2 Liberty is also granted to serve the Standing counsel for the State of Uttar Pradesh In the meantime, interim protection is granted to the petitioners for a period of four weeks from today. The petitioners are directed to cooperate in the investigation at all stages. Additionally, the interim protection is also subject to the compliance of other conditions, as enumerated in Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. (VISHAL ANAND) (R.S. NARAYANAN) ASTT. REGISTRARcumPS COURT MASTER (NSH)