Allowed

Champa Devi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC30 Apr 2019BAIL/18118/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed bail to Champa Devi in a criminal case alleging affray and abetment to murder. The court cited her lack of criminal history, sudden fight circumstances, and potential as a witness as factors for release on personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to standard conditions.

Champa Devi Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18118 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Champa Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gajendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against five accused persons, namely Kandhai Lal, Premraj, Chanpa Devi, Puja and Rewati alleging that on 14.11.2018 they assaulted four persons including Sukhlal with lathi-danda, sharp-edged weapon. Sukhlal received three injuries, one on head, resultantly died.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is the lady. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There are general allegations against all accused persons. It is not clear from the prosecution case, who is the author of head injury due to which he died. There is cross case in case crime no. 43 of 2019. It was a case of sudden fight and incident has taken place in spur of moment, applicant's side Champa Devi and Premraj have received injuries. At this stage, it is not possible to decide who is the aggressor. There is no independent witness and no legal evidence against the applicant. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. She is languishing in jail since 18.11.2019 (more than five 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.

¶8

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.

¶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 opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶10

Let applicant Champa Devi involved in Case Crime No. 691 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 325, 452, 307, 304, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Pooranpur, District Pilibhit be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond

¶11

and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 30.4.2019

¶19

A. Singh

Champa Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Champa 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jabbar Ali Vs State of U.P.

Dr. Sanjida and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gaurishankar Vs State of U.P.

Shahrukh Vs State of U.P.

Nazarul Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Sunita Vs State of U.P.