Allowed

Manisha v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Nov 2019BAIL/48119/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In bail application under Cr. Misc. Bail App. No. 48119 of 2019 for Section 302/34 IPC case, applicant wife of deceased accused of implicating husband's killer falsely. Bench found fit case despite body found in applicant's house and granted bail on personal bond and two sureties without expressing opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant to be released on furnishing personal bond and two sureties in like amount with standard conditions against tampering, intimidating witnesses, and regular attendance.

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

¶1

Court No. - 41 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48119 of 2019

¶2

Applicant :- Manisha Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

¶4

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

¶5

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is wife of the deceased. There are two minor children aged about 3 and 2 years from the wedlock of the applicant and deceased. The economic condition of the deceased was not good due to which he committed suicide. Initially the FIR of the alleged incident was lodged under section 306 IPC after six days of the alleged incident. There was no illicit relation in between the applicant and co-accused Pooran. There is no cogent evidence on record with regard to the illicit relation in between the applicant and co-accused Pooran. There is no eye witness of the alleged incident. The applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. The applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. False story has been concocted by the prosecution. The applicant is a lady. There is no criminal history of the applicant and is in jail since 31.5.2019.

¶6

Per contra, learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail and argued that in postmortem report three abrasions have also been found on the body of the deceased and the cause of death of the deceased has been shown asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. The dead body of the deceased was found in the house of the applicant, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for bail.

¶7

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶8

Let the applicant Manisha involved in Case Crime No. 95 of 2019, under Sections 302, 34 IPC, P.S. Sikandra, District Agra be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶9

The applicant will not tamper with the evidences.

¶10

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and cooperate with the trial.

¶11

The applicant will appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.

¶12

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

¶13

Order Date :- 13.11.2019/A.

Manisha v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manisha 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

Manoj Sonkar and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajeshwar Tyagi Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Lalaram Vs State of U.P. and Another

Punuwa Vs State of U.P.

Madan Kumar Bind Vs State of U.P.

Sirtaj Singh Vs State of U.P.