Allowed

Meenu Sain v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Jun 2022BAIL/5699/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court Justice Ajay Bhanot granted bail to Meenu Sain in a criminal case involving Sections 406, 420, 504, 506, and 120B IPC, finding merit in her counsel's submission that she was falsely implicated in a commercial dispute and posed no threat to witnesses or evidence. Conditions were imposed regarding non-tampering and attendance.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with conditions not to tamper with evidence or influence witnesses.

Meenu Sain Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 43

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5699 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Meenu Sain Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shadab Alam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 572 of 2019 at Police Station Kasna/Beta-2, District Gautam Budh Nagar under Sections 406, 420, 504, 506, 120B IPC. The applicant is in jail since 12.09.2021.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Special Judge, (S.C./S.T. Act), Gautam Budh Nagar, on 14.01.2022.

¶7

Shri Shadab Alam, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant is a lady. The applicant is the wife of the principal offender Anil Sain. The FIR arises out of business transaction between the husband of the applicant and the informant which did not materialise. The applicant's husband runs a firm registered under the name and style of KDM Enterprises. The applicant has no concern with the business transaction of her husband. The criminal case is being leveraged in

¶8

the disputed money claim by the informant. Most importantly the parties had arrived at a settlement which was overlooked by the investigating officer. The applicant has three young children.

¶9

Explaining the criminal history of the applicant, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the said cases arise out of pure commercial transactions between the applicant's husband and his business partners. The applicant cannot be linked with the same. The criminal cases do not depict commission of any heinous crime by the applicant and have no bearing on the instant case. The applicant is not a flight risk and there is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.

¶10

Shri Rishi Chaddha, learned A.G.A could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Learned AGA does not contest the criminal history of the applicant as disclosed in the bail application.

¶11

I see merit in the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and accordingly hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶12

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case,

¶13

the bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant- Meenu Sain be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶16

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶17

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶20

Order Date :- 9.6.2022 Pravin

¶21

Digitally signed by PRAVIN VERMA Date: 2022.06.14 15:50:16 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Meenu Sain v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Meenu Sain 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

Akshay Vs State of U.P.

Sabir Ali Vs State of U.P.

Ramjani Vs State of U.P.

Shahrukh Vs State of U.P.

Vishal Vs State of U.P.

Salman Vs State of U.P.