Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Sonam Yadav vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|30 September, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37505 of 2019 Applicant :- Sonam Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Adeel Ahmad Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Amit Chaurasiya, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against two unknown persons alleging that on 27.8.2019 some unknown persons killed Ashok Yadav (brother of complainant). According to postmortem report, two incised wound injuries were found on the body of deceased. During investigation, the names of Switi and Sonam Yadav were surfaced and it was found that there was illicit relation between deceased and Switi due to which Switi killed the deceased with the help of Sonam Yadav. Knife used in in crime but without blood stained and blood stained cloths were recovered at the pointing out of Switi.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is unmarried girl and student of B.T.C. course. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Main role of assault was assigned to co-accused Switi. Knife used in the crime and blood stained cloths were also recovered at the pointing out of co-accused Switi. Applicant was not named in the F.I.R. During investigation, the name of applicant was surfaced after thought and due legal consultation on the basis of suspicion. There are general allegations against the applicant. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. There is no independent witness and no legal evidence against the applicant. She is languishing in jail since 1.9.2019 (near about one month) having no criminal history and in case she is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that applicant has no criminal history.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let applicant Sonam Yadav involved in Case Crime No. 197 of 2019, under Sections 302, 120-B IPC, Police Station Haldharpur, District Mau be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which she is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which she is suspected.
5. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 30.9.2019 A. Singh
Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37505 of 2019 Applicant :- Sonam Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Adeel Ahmad Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Affidavit of compliance filed today is taken on record.
In compliance of order dated 19.9.2019, Anurag Arya, Superintendent of Police, Mau has filed his personnel affidavit stating therein that an inquiry was conducted against erring officials and warned for future.
Explanation is satisfactory.
It is expected that he will take care in future. No further action is required.
Order Date :- 30.9.2019 A. Singh
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sonam Yadav vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
30 September, 2019
Judges
  • Aniruddha Singh
Advocates
  • Adeel Ahmad Khan