Allowed

Smt. Sunita v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC24 Sept 2019BAIL/36382/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 36382 of 2019, the Court allowed bail to Smt. Sunita, accused of cheating and forgery involving forged educational documents for a teacher's job. The applicant, who is pregnant, was granted bail subject to execution of a personal bond and two sureties with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail upon executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties in the like amount.

Smt. Sunita Vs State of U.P. — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36382 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Sunita Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Himanshu Pandey,Shailesh Agrawal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.

¶6

This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Smt. Sunita in connection with Case Crime No.33 of 2019, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Gonda, District Aligarh.

¶7

The allegation made against the applicant in the first information report is that she had secured job of Assistant Teacher by furnishing forged documents.

¶8

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. He submitted that the applicant is a lady and is carrying pregnancy of about eight months. He further submitted that the applicant has been terminated from the service. He submitted that all the offences are triable by the court of Magistrate. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 19.08.2019 and in case, she is released on bail she will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea.

¶10

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶11

Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant Smt. Sunita involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶14

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses;

¶15

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission;

¶16

v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

Order Date :- 24.9.2019R./

Smt. Sunita v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Sunita 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

Mehboob Vs State of U.P.

Ravindra Kumar Vashishtha @ Annu Vs State of U.P.

Hasmuddin @ Shahrukh Vs State of U.P.

Raj Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Raheesh @ Sandeep Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Kumar Gupta @ Rakesh Vs State of U.P.