Allowed

Prabhawati Devi and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Nov 2021BAIL/32763/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed bail to two female applicants charged in a case of hurt and culpable homicide. Bail was granted on a personal bond without sureties until court functioning is restored, subject to strict conditions regarding attendance and trial conduct.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on personal bond without sureties (pending proper functioning of courts), with strict conditions regarding appearance and trial conduct.

Prabhawati Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32763 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Prabhawati Devi And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Saroj Kumar Dubey,Akhilesh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

By means of this application, the applicants who are involved in case crime no.107 of 2021, under Section 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 304, 201 IPC, Police Station-Paniyara, District-Maharajganj are seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶7

Submission made by learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants who are ladies, are named in the FIR. As per text of the FIR, it is clear that it is Dharmendra who has given deadly assault upon the head of the informant's father and the FIR is conspicuously silent with regard to other assailants and their respective weapons. The other injured persons have mostly sustained simple injuries over their person. There is no fracture or permanent disfiguration. The applicants are falsely implicated in the present case. Taking into account that neither any role has been attributed nor any weapon has been assigned to the applicants, they are liable to be released on bail. The applicants are languishing in jail since 04.04.2021.

¶8

Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail.

¶10

Let the applicants, Prabhawati Devi and Seema Devi , who are involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶11

(i) THE APPLICANTS SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT THEY 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.

¶12

(ii) THE APPLICANTS SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH THEIR COUNSEL. IN CASE OF THEIR ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST THEM UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

¶13

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANTS MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE THEIR PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANTS FAIL TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THEM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

¶14

(iv) THE APPLICANTS 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 APPLICANTS 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 THEM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶15

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANTS.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶17

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicants shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶18

Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:

¶19

The applicants shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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.

¶23

Order Date :- 2.11.2021 Sumit S

Prabhawati Devi and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabhawati Devi 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Omprakash @ Guddu Vs State of U.P.

Shailesh Sahani Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramu Vs State of U.P.

Chaudhary Danish @ Kala Vs State of U.P.

Panne Lal Gond Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vijay Tomar Vs State of U.P.