Allowed

Rubi Alias Upasana v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Feb 2020BAIL/6266/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a bail application filed by Rubi Alias Upasana in a murder case. Relying on Section 437 Cr.P.C., the court released her on bail with personal bond and sureties, imposing strict conditions to prevent tampering, ensuring trial attendance, and preventing misuse of liberty.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on bail via personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions of appearance and non-interference with evidence.

Rubi Alias Upasana Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6266 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Rubi Alias Upasana Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Pati Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

Vakalatnama filed by Sri Yogesh Kumar on behalf of the first informant is taken on record

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Anand Pati Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Yogesh Kumar, learned counsel for the first informant and the learned A.G.A.

¶8

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant, Rubi Alias Upasana , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 414 of 2019, under Sections 302, 323, 504 I.P.C., registered at P.S. Khurja Nagar, District Bulandshahar.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that in the F.I.R no one is named as an accused. It was only thereafter that the applicant has been implicated in the present matter. The present matter is of circumstantial in nature. The applicant is the wife of the first informant and the daughter-in-law of the deceased. The evidence coming forward is the statement of Smt. Anshu / Annexure- 8 to the affidavit who is the neighbour of the deceased and the applicant has stated that on the day of the incident the movements of the applicant in the house were suspicious and were even different from the normal days. Later on, on the cry and shrieks of the applicant she went inside the house and found Smt. Satyavati Devi lying in a pool of blood. It is thus argued that apart from the said evidence there is no other evidence whatsoever to connect the applicant in the present matter. Further the attention of the Court is drawn to paragraph 25 of the affidavit in which it is mentioned that the applicant is a lady having a child of about 07 months and there is no one to take care of as she is in jail. The recovery of a stone from the pointing out of the applicant is said to be a planted recovery without any corroboration whatsoever.The applicant is a lady having no criminal history is in jail since 18.10.2019.

¶10

Per contra learned A.G.A and learned counsel for the first informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant had passed on wrong information to her husband who is the first informant and on that information only the F.I.R was registered. The applicant is actively involved in the present matter thus the present bail application be rejected.

¶11

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, perusing the record and particularly looking to the fact that the applicant is a lady having a child of 07 months she is entitled to the benefit of Section 437 Cr.P.C.

¶12

Let the applicant, Rubi Alias Upasana, 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:-

¶13

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

¶14

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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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

¶18

IPC.

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 25.2.2020 AS Rathor

¶22

(Samit Gopal,J.)

Rubi Alias Upasana v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rubi Alias Upasana 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.

Smt Armana Vs State of U.P.

Pushpendra Vs State of U.P.

Vipin Vs State of U.P.