Smt. Sandhya Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 73

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42026 of 2021

Applicant :- Smt. Sandhya Mishra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Prakash Singh,Krishna Kumar Patel,Raj Kiran Chaudhary Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 396 of 2019, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 384, 120-B IPC and Section 7/13 of Anti Corruption Act, Police Station Kopaganj, District Mau, during pendency of trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that there is no direct evidence to connect the applicant with the alleged offence.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that similarly place co-accused Sanjay Kumar Gupta, Sunny Gupta, Sandeep Kumar Maurya and Zafar Akbar had already been enlarged bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court and case of the applicant stands on the same footing as that of the co-accused.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that in another Case Crime No. 508 of 2022, applicant had already been granted bail by the court below.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the applicant is in jail since 06.09.2021 and has no criminal history to her credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in the trial by all means. There is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses, as such, she be released on bail.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the fact that similarly placed co-accused had already been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court and that the applicant is is in jail since 06.09.2021 and has no criminal antecedent.

¶13

Having considered the rival submission made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that similarly placed co-accused had already been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court and there is no direct evidence to connect the applicant with the alleged offence and that the applicant is in jail since 06.09.2021, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.

¶14

Let the applicant Smt. Sandhya Mishra be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶15

The applicant shall continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶16

The applicant shall not tamper with the witnesses.

¶17

The applicant shall not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶18

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶20

The bail application is accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 22.4.2022 Nadim

¶21

Digitally signed by NADIM ALAM Date: 2022.04.22 17:00:39 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Sandhya Mishra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Sandhya Mishra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tulse Vs State of U.P.

Sri.Ram Prasad Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another

Babbu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Veer Vs State of U.P.

Radhey Shyam Sharma Vs Union of India and Another

Rajoo Alias Chhote Lal Vs State of U.P.