Allowed

Smt Armana v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Feb 2020BAIL/6250/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal miscellaneous bail application involved Smt Armana seeking bail in a murder and attempt to murder case. The High Court allowed the bail application after hearing counsel, imposing strict conditions regarding trial proceedings and prevention of evidence tampering.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on personal bond and two sureties with stringent conditions regarding trial attendance and non-interference with prosecution.

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

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6250 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Smt Armana Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Safiullah,Sunil Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.

¶6

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant, Smt Armana , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 179 of 2018, under Sections 302, 201, 315, 147, 148, 149, 120-B and 34 I.P.C., registered at P.S. Sambhal, District Sambhal.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the F.I.R was lodged against unknown persons. There is nothing mentioned in the F.I.R which could go to show the involvement of the applicant in the present matter. For the first time after about 22 days the name of applicant surfaced in the statement of Rizwan and Chhote by way of an extra judicial confession. It is argued that the same is very weak type of evidence and without any corroboration. There is no other reliable and cogent evidence to connect the applicant in the present incident. There is a recovery of an Aadhar Card of Mamta Devi and a school IDCard of Karnpal, the deceased persons from the pointing out of the applicant. The recovery is said to be false and planted and there is no public witness to the same. It is further argued that co-accused Sufiya has been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.06.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 41383 of 2018. The applicant is a lady having no criminal history is in jail since 15.04.2018.

¶8

Per contra learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Let the applicant, Smt Armana, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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:-

¶10

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶11

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶12

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶13

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C.

¶14

(V) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 and the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC.

¶15

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶16

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶17

Order Date :- 25.2.2020 AS Rathor

¶18

(Samit Gopal,J.)

Smt Armana v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Armana 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

Zakir Vs State of U.P.

Rajmangal Vs State of U.P.

Achchhe Hasan @ Najmul Hasan Vs State of U.P.

Pushpendra Vs State of U.P.

Rubi Alias Upasana Vs State of U.P.

Vipin Vs State of U.P.