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

Zameela @ Anjali vs State Of U P

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

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30341 of 2019 Applicant :- Zameela @ Anjali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Saxena Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P and perused the material available on record.
Contention raised on behalf of the applicant is that the applicant being a lady has been falsely implicated in this case on account of the enmity with the informant. The main accusation is against co-accused Sudhir. Even in the dying declaration there is no whisper to the name of the applicant that she ever participated in the commission of the crime or she ever supported the other co-accused. Causal presence has been imputed against the applicant that too without any specific role. The applicant is in jail since 12.1.2018. The other co-accused Vipin Sharma has been admitted to bail by a coordinate bench of this court in criminal misc. bail application no. 23774 of 2018 on 28.11.2018, a copy of which has been annexed and marked as Annexure-3 to this applicant. The applicant being a lady is entitled to the benefit of section 437 Cr.P.C. In case the applicant is admitted to bail, there is no possibility of absconding or misusing the liberty of bail. The applicant does not bear any criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed prayer for bail. However, learned A.G.A. has not disputed the aforesaid facts.
Without entering into merit of the case but considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Zameela @ Anjali involved in Case Crime No.
16 of 2018, under Sections 366, 323, 342, 326, 304 I.P.C.
Police Station Subhash Nagar, District Bareilly be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing 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 he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he 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 him 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 :- 30.7.2019 N.A.
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

Zameela @ Anjali vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
30 July, 2019
Judges
  • Arvind Kumar Mishra I
Advocates
  • Pradeep Saxena