Allowed

Smt. Nanhi Devi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Feb 2018BAIL/1977/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed bail to the accused lady, granting a personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions against tampering with evidence, intimidating witnesses, and committing similar offences.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in like amount, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence and intimidating witnesses.

Smt. Nanhi Devi Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 22

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1977 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Nanhi Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pawankumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State, and perused the record.

¶6

According to prosecution case, FIR was lodged against unknown person alleging that grand-daughter of complainant Umrao Lal was kidnapped on 8.7.2017 and she came back on 5.10.2017. On 5.10.2017 statement of victim was recorded, in which she stated that this accused Nanhi gave her some intoxicated drink, she became unconscious; Harun Beg and his nephew took her on motorcycle to Dehradun; Nanhi sold her to Harun Beg for Rs.30,000/- and Harun Beg wanted to sell her again in Delhi; Harun Beg committed rape with her and he snatched Rs.5000/- from her.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case; she is a lady; she has no criminal history; according to prosecution case, main allegation is against Harun Beg; the applicant is languishing in jail since 22.10.2017(more than three months) and in case she is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶8

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. though opposed the prayer for bail but admitted that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶9

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 view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let applicant Smt. Nanhi Devi involved in Case Crime No.1535 of 2017, under Section 363, 372 IPC, Police Station Khutar, District Shahjahanpur 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:-

¶11

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶12

2.The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶13

3.The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶14

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.

¶15

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.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶17

Order Date :- 12.2.2018 P.P.

Smt. Nanhi Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Nanhi Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saurabh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Anwar Vs State of U.P.

Rameshwar Vs State of U.P.

Inam and Another Vs State of U.P.

Abid and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P.

Manju Vs State of U.P.