Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3978 of 2019 Applicant :- Smt. Raisa Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi,Amit Daga Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that applicant is not named in F.I.R. and has been falsely implicated being mother of main accused Irshad @ Kallua; that as per averments made in F.I.R., the engagement of deceased was solemnized on 11.7.2016 by her parents elsewhere but since named accused Irshad @ Kallua was willing to make marriage with her, in the night of 14/15.7.2016 he came through roof of his house to the roof of first informant where deceased was sleeping with her parents, brothers and sisters and he thrown acid on sleeping deceased, and upon screams of deceased and her mother when first informant and family members awoke, named accused fled away by throwing acid on them also; that due to acid injuries during treatment death of Taiyaba did take place on 12.9.2016, her autopsy was conducted on 13.9.2016 and case was converted from Section 326-A I.P.C. to Section 302 I.P.C.; that in their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. first informant and his family members have not assigned any role to applicant but by way of improvement it was contended that at the time of throwing acid on deceased by Irshad @ Kallua, he was accompanied by his mother-applicant, his sister and Tai; that in dying declaration by way of further improvement applicant and her sister-in-law Rasheedan have been assigned with the role of catching hold of legs of deceased; that co-accused Rasheedan has been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.12.2018 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.33287 of 2018, copy produced for perusal and is taken on record; that applicant is not alleged to have thrown acid on deceased; that applicant was neither present at the time of incident nor caught legs of deceased nor participated in throwing of acid on her; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 1.10.2016.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, grant of bail to co-accused as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Smt. Raisa be released on bail in Case Crime No.416 of 2016, under Sections 302, 307, 326-A I.P.C., P.S. Govind Nagar, District Mathura, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
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.
Order Date :- 30.1.2019 Kpy