Allowed

Sunita and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Jul 2021BAIL/22738/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court granted bail to applicants Sunita and Anjali alias Sita Devi in a criminal case involving excise offences. Respondents to execute personal bond with two sureties and comply with specific conditions regarding trial attendance and conduct. Application clarified to not reflect on merits.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties of Rs. One Lakh each, subject to specific conditions including attendance and non-interference.

Sunita and Another Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22738 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Sunita And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manvendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Sanjay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. They are innocent and have no criminal antecedent. It is further submitted that a false and concocted story has been set up against the applicants, whereas they did not commit any such offence. The applicant no. 2 has newly born baby of five months. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicants have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicants that they are ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make themselves available before the court whenever required. The applicants are languishing in jail since 6.4.2021. They undertake that they will not misuse the liberty, if granted, therefore, they may be released on bail.

¶7

Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party vehemently opposed the prayer.

¶8

Having heard submissions of learned counsel of both sides, considering nature of accusation, severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22 , without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶9

Let the applicants - (i) Sunita and (ii) Anjali alias Sita Devi involved in Case Crime No. 68 of 2021, under Section 272 IPC and 60(2) Excise Act, Police Station Jahanabad, District

¶10

Fatehpur be released on bail, on their executing a personal bond and two sureties of Rs. One Lakh each (one should be of a family member), with the following conditions:

¶11

The applicants will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶12

They will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶13

They will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶14

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

¶15

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶16

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶17

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶18

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.

¶19

Order Date :- 16.7.2021 Digamber

¶20

Digitally signed by Justice Vivek Kumar Singh Date: 2021.07.19 15:51:21 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sunita and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunita and Another 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

Shiv Charan @ Bhola Vs State of U.P.

Vimal Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Jahangeer Vs State of U.P.

Abusad Vs State of U.P.

Hasruddin Vs State of U.P.

Sanjeev Kumar Vs State of U.P.