Court allowed bail application of Anjali Sharma accused of murder under S. 302 IPC. Ruled fit case for bail citing parity with co-accused and applying Data Ram principles despite gravity of offence.
Released on bail by executing personal bond and providing two sureties with standard bail 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. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31367 of 2021
Applicant :- Anjali Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Singh,Pratibha Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Anjali Sharma in connection with Case Crime No.370 of 2019, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station Sector-39 Noida, district Gautambuddha Nagar.
The first information report of this incident was lodged by the complainant against two named persons including the applicant. It was alleged in the first information report that complainant's nephew Shyam Sunder was living at village Sadarpur Sector-45 along with wife and three children. The wife of Shyam Sunder was having illicit relations with the applicant. It was also alleged that on 04.05.2019 he received the information that Shyam Sunder has been murdered.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. He submitted that only on the basis of suspicion on account of havingi llicit relations between the wife of deceased and co-accused Ankit the deceased was done to death by co-accused Ankit. He submitted that present applicant was made as an accused of the murder of her own husband. He submitted that there is no eye-witness of the incident and only on the basis of suspicion the applicant has been roped in as an accused in this case. He submitted that nothing incriminating has been recovered at the pointing out of the applicant and there is no evidence which could possibly connection the applicant in the commission of murder of her own husband. He submitted that the co-accused Ankit has been admitted to the concession of bail by another Bench of this Court by order dated 08.01.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.44113 of 2020, copy whereof has been annexed on page no.36 of the paper book and the role assigned to the applicant is similar to the role of the other co-accused, who have already been enlarged on bail. He claims parity. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 09.05.2019 and has no criminal antecedents to his credit, hence she is entitled to be released on bail and she will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea. However, learned A.G.A. does not dispute the factum of parity.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, submission of learned
counsel for the parties, considering the law laid down in the case of Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018 (3), SCC, 2 and also the fact that aforesaid co-accused has been admitted to the concession of bail by this Court, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant Anjali Sharma involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses;
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission;
v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by learned counsel for the applicant along with 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.
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.
Order Date :- 29.11.2021 R./
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to release on bail in the murder case given parity with co-accused already granted bail.
Whether the nature of the offence and existence of eye-witnesses and incriminating evidence should preclude bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and othersApplied¶10
Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018 (3), SCC, 2 · Who else cites this
Anjali Sharma
Ajit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
