Allowed

Heerakali @ Hardevi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Jan 2022BAIL/48799/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a bail application for Heerakali @ Hardevi, an accused with no criminal record, in a case involving Sections 308, 323, and 504 IPC. The court found a prima facie case for bail given the cross-case version, lack of specific role assignment, and no likelihood of tampering. Bail was granted on personal and surety bond with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant be released on bail on a personal bond and two sureties, each in the like amount, subject to standard conditions of conduct and appearance.

Heerakali @ Hardevi Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48799 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Heerakali @ Hardevi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.

¶5

Heard over bail application moved by applicant, Heerakali @ Hardevi, in Case Crime No. 618 of 2018, under Sections- 308, 323, 504 I.P.C., P.S. Fatehganj West, District- Bareilly.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accusedapplicant is innocent; she has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 21.10.2021; she is of no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of fleeing from course of justice or tempering with evidence in case of release on bail; it is a cross case version; both sides have sustained injuries; which side was aggressor, is a question of fact to be seen by trial Court; general allegations are there; no specific role has been assigned to the applicant. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

¶7

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed, but could not oppose this fact that the applicant is of no criminal antecedent and it is a cross case version.

¶8

Having heard learned counsels for both sides and gone through materials placed on record as well as considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but, without commenting on merits of the case, a case for bail is made out.

¶9

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant, Heerakali @ Hardevi, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on her executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties, each, in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶11

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶12

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶13

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶14

The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless her personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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.

¶18

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel her bail.

¶19

Order Date :- 17.1.2022 Kamarjahan

Heerakali @ Hardevi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Heerakali @ Hardevi 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sartaj Vs State of U.P.

Wasim Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Krishna Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Arman Shah and Another Vs State of U.P Thru Secretary Home Lknw.

Ramesh Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Digvijay Singh Vs State of U.P.