This bail application by Santo Devi sought release in a case under Section 306 IPC. The court observed the release of co-accused and granted bail on a personal bond with conditions, considering the pandemic situation.
Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 2
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25073 of 2020
Applicant :- Santo Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shyam Sunder Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.
The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 151 of 2019, under Section 306 IPC, Police Station Malwan, District Fatehpur, during pendency of trial.
This is second bail application. First bail application came to be rejected on 10.2.2020.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that changed circumstance in approaching the Court for bail is that all other co-accused namely, Ram Avtar (father-in-law) and Bablu (Dewar) have been enlarged on bail by coordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 18.6.2020 & 26.8.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Applications No. 14507 of 2020 and 2581 of 2020 respectively; applicant claims parity; applicant is a lady; applicant is languishing in jail since 5.12.2019, and in case she is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant- Santo Devi involved in aforesaid case crime 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when 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.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under
Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial 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 shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) 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 absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law.
(v) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(vi) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
(vii) 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.
In view of the extraordinary situation prevailing in the State due to Covid19, the directions of this Court dated 6.4.2020 passed in Public Interest Litigation No. 564 of 2020 (In re vs. State of U.P.), shall also be complied. The order reads thus:
"Looking to impediments in arranging sureties because of lockdown, while invoking powers under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, we deem it appropriate to order that all the accused-applicants whose bail applications came to be allowed on or after 15th March, 2020 but have not been released due to non-availability of sureties as a consequence to lockdown may be released on executing personal bond as ordered by the Court or to the satisfaction of the jail authorities where such accused is imprisoned, provided the accused-applicants undertakes to furnish required sureties within a period of one month from the date of his/her actual release."
Order Date :- 22.10.2020 Mukesh Kr.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to be released on bail considering the changed circumstances including release of co-accused and lack of apprehension of misuse.
5 provisions across 2 enactments
Santo Devi
Suneet Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
