Allowed

Neelam Devi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Jun 2021BAIL/7043/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted bail to the applicant on the grounds that she was falsely implicated, entitled to statutory benefits, and posed no flight risk, relying on the principle of using bail in such circumstances as per a precedent.

What did the court decide?

Order of bail granted on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of attendance, no tampering with witnesses, and no illegal activities.

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

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7043 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Neelam Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Singh,Ashwani Kumar Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Narendra Deo Upahdayay,Vinay Bhushan Upadhyay

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vinay Bhushan Upadhyay, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned AGA -I, appearing for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that the applicant is not named in the FIR and her name has came into light during the course of investigation. It is further submitted that the applicant is a lady and she is entitled for the benefit under Section 437 (ii) Cr.P.C. .Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that she is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make herself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 12.12.2020. It has been pointed out that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶7

Learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer.

¶8

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶9

Let applicant- Neelam Devi , be released on bail in Case Crime No.0906 of 2020, under Sections- 323, 504, 506, 452, 308 IPC, Police Station- Gola, District- Gorakhpur, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶10

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

¶11

She will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶12

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

¶13

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.

¶14

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.

¶15

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

¶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 :- 10.6.2021 Dev/-

Neelam Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neelam Devi 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arbaaz Vs State of U.P. and Another

Umesh Singh Vs State of U.P.

Mannu Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Pawan @ Panna and Another Vs State of U.P.

Ravindra Vs State of U.P.

Chand Vs State of U.P.