ARPAN SAXENA Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. Ankita Priyadarshini, recall applicant-opposite party no.2, in person; Sri Ramesh Upadhyaya, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Rajan Upadhyaya, learned counsel for the applicant; learned AGA for opposite party no.1 and perused the material on record.

(2.) The above noted application has been filed by opposite party no.2 recall applicant, praying that order dtd. 7/3/2025 of modification of condition no.3 of the order dtd. 17/2/2021 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.9565 of 2020 directing release of the applicant's passport passed without hearing recall applicant-opposite party no.2, may be recalled. The passport of the applicant may not be released and the condition no.3 in the anticipatory bail order dtd. 17/2/2021 of applicant passed by this Court may be restored.

(3.) The recall applicant-opposite party no.2, appearing in person, has submitted that the applicant, Arpan Saxena, is her husband. The order dtd. 7/3/2025 passed by this Court was passed without giving opportunity of hearing to her. The applicant did not complied the condition of surrender of passport as per orders of this Court dtd. 18/12/2020 and 17/2/2021 for long time. The applicant wants to flee away from the country by selling her matrimonial home and her jewelries. He wants to settle abroad alongwith his parents. She has further submitted that in case the applicant is allowed to leave the country, divorce proceedings pending between them before the court at Delhi shall be prejudiced. She has also alleged that number of criminal cases are pending against the applicant. Therefore he does not deserves to be returned his passport. Hence it has been prayed that order dtd. 7/3/2025 passed by this Court should be recalled.