Allowed

Kavita v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Nov 2020BAIL/19128/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application for the applicant Kavita charged with multiple offences including attempted murder and homicide, the court allowed the prayer for bail. The court held it was a fit case to release her on bail after considering that other accused persons had already been granted bail and observing the period of her detention.

What did the court decide?

The prayer for bail is granted. The applicant is released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties.

Kavita Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19128 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Kavita Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shashi Bhushan Kunwar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This is second bail application on behalf of the applicant. Her first bail application was rejected by another bench of this Court, vide order dated 10.01.2020, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 55867 of 2019.

¶7

This second bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 149 of 2019 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 307, 302, 324 IPC, Police Station Ubhaon, District Ballia with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶8

The First Information Report of this incident was got lodged by complainant Sunil Kumar and it was mentioned in the First Information Report that on 06.09.2019 the complainant was celebrating the birth day of his bhanja (sister's son) at his house and fireworks was going on in which uncle of the complainant got injured. The complainant tried to console him. Meanwhile, Sunita wife of Chandan came, she started misbehaving and abusing the complainant and beat his mother Vidyawati and two sisters, namely, Archana and Vandana. She cut too at the jaw of his mother Vidyawati by her teeth. The complainant's brother took his mother for treatment to PHC, Siyar. Thereafter, Sunita went to her home and called out her father, brother Vinay Kumar, Ajit Kumar, Nand Lal, Kavita and Dhurendra from Chak Upadhyaya, who all rushed at complainant's house having lathi-danda and knife in their hands and threatened to kill, they all assaulted the complainant side, namely, Subhash, Ramashray, Gautam son of Lalta, Sanjay, Sandhya and Ravina. All the injured persons were taken to Hospital CHC, Siyar where Subhash succumbed to his injuries. Later on, Ramashray too succumbed to his injuries. Both the deceased received stab wounds as is evident from medical examination report, which are annexed as Annexures - 2 and 3 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application.

¶9

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that in this matter seven persons were named including the present accused applicant and all the accused persons except present accused Kavita have already been granted bail by another Benches of this Court. It is further submitted that general role has been assigned to all the accused. It is further submitted that coaccused Vinay Kumar and Ajeet Kumar who were assigned the role of assault by knife have already been granted bail. Therefore, the present accused applicant also deserves to be released on bail. It is further argued that the applicant is in jail since 07.09.2019 and that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that report of this incident was lodged by the complainant against his own relatives, therefore, there is no falsehood in the FIR version.

¶11

Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties, period of detention of the applicant and all the attending facts and circumstances of the case and considering that other six accused have been granted bail, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court at this stage of matter deems it a fit case to release the applicant on bail.

¶12

The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.

¶13

Let applicant Kavita involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶14

(1). The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law;

¶15

(2). The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶16

(3). In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure her presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court may initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with

¶17

law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(4). The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of her bail and proceed against her in accordance with law.

¶19

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the learned counsel for the applicant alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.

¶20

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶21

Order Date :- 4.11.2020 LBY

Kavita v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kavita 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manorav @ Saurabh Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P.

Satya Alias Satpal Balmiki Vs State of U.P.

Arvind Vs State of U.P.

Surendra Jaysawal Vs State of U.P.