Allowed

Smt. Saroj v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Jan 2020BAIL/1467/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single-judge court granted bail to Smt. Saroj, mother of the deceased falsely implicated in a murder case, allowing release on personal bond with sureties subject to standard conditions against tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Ordered release of applicant on personal bond and two reliable sureties with conditions against tampering with evidence and pressuring witnesses.

Smt. Saroj Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1467 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Saroj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Desh Ratan Chaudhary Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Desh Ratan Chaudhary, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicantSmt. Saroj in Case Crime No. 670 of 2019, under Sections 302, 201 I.P.C., Police Station- Baghpat, District- Baghpat with the prayer to enlarge her on bail.

¶7

Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is the mother of the deceased and she has been falsely implicated in the present case by one of the witnesses namely Anand Kumar introduced by the prosecution after one month and ten days of the incident in his second statement who happens to be distinctly relative to her husband. It is argued that Anand Kumar has stated that in the presence of applicant other co-accused had forcibly abducted the deceased in a vehicle. Learned counsel has argued that on account of animosity in the family the applicant has been dragged in the present case and she has no motive to murder her only son. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from that of all other co-accused who are actively involved in the commission of crime, having no criminal history to her credit, deserves to be released on bail.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not point out anything material to the contrary.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Let applicant- Smt. Saroj be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the

¶11

court concerned subject to following conditions that:-

¶12

1.The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶13

2.The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶14

3.The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

¶15

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the courts below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of the applicant.

¶16

Order Date :- 18.1.2020 Vikas

Smt. Saroj v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Saroj 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

Begum Reshma Vs State of U.P.

Vakeel Saifi Vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Pratap Rai Vs State of U.P.

Chheddu Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Singh Vs State of U.P.

Kurban Vs State of U.P.