Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27015 of 2021 Applicant :- Smt. Premlata Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Viveka Nand Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajay Kumar Srivastava,Amit Rai,Pragya Srivastava
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Viveka Nand Rai, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Amit Rai, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri A.K. Tripathi, learned brief holder for the State and perused the material on record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Smt. Premlata seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 199 of 2020, under Sections 120-B, 323, 302, 504 IPC, registered at P.S. Mahawan, District Mathura.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that although the applicant is named in the First Information Report along with two other accused persons and one unknown person but she has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the role of the applicant has been assigned is of taking away the deceased from her house. It is argued that the applicant as per the prosecution itself as stated in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of the first informant was the friend of the deceased. It is argued that there is no eye witness to the murder. It is argued that as per the prosecution case, the role assigned to the applicant is that only of taking away the deceased from her house after which it is alleged that co-accused Kishan, Chandra Pal and one unknown person met them and there was a fight and then co-accused Kishan abused the deceased and shot her on her head. It is argued that as per postmortem report, the deceased has received only one firearm wound of entry and the cause of death is due to the said firearm injury. It is argued that even the two alleged eye witnesses namely Deepak Prakash and Raj Prakash have not assigned the role of firing on the deceased to the applicant. It is argued that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 18 of the affidavit and is in jail since 02.12.2020. It is argued that the applicant is a lady and she is entitled to the benefit of Section 437 Cr.P.C.
Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is the person who had taken away the deceased from her house after which there was a quarrel and fight with the other co-accused persons and she was shot as such he is involved in the present case.
After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is apparent that the applicant is a lady and the role assigned to the applicant is that of taking away the deceased from her house. There is no eye witness to the murder.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Let the applicant Smt. Premlata, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.
(V) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC.
(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
The bail application is allowed.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 29.7.2021 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.)