Allowed

Muskan v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.Home Lko.

Allahabad HC5 Jul 2023/303/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to an accused person charged with murder and other offences. The court noted the main witness implicated only another co-accused, the long duration of detention, and the gender of the applicant as grounds for release.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with furnishing of personal bond and two reliable sureties of like amount, subject to attendance and standard conditions.

Muskan Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:43161

¶2

Court No. - 11

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 303 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Muskan Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Singh,Shesh Ram Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Supplementary Affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶8

The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.166 of 2020 under sections 302, 201, 404, 411 IPC, P.S. PGI, District Lucknow.

¶9

The allegations, as levelled in the first information report, is that the husband of the informant was missing, Subsequently, it was revealed that a dead body was lying and on inspection of the dead body, it was found that the body was that of the husband of the informant. An apprehension was expressed that the husband of the informant was killed by one Nitin Gopal @ Pintu along with his sister in law Muskan and wife Poonam Gopal. The apprehension was expressed on the ground that they used to make financial transactions in between Nitin Gopal and the husband of the informant. Subsequently, after investigation, based upon certain recoveries of the ATM Cards as well as Dupatta, charge-sheet was filed against Nitin Gopal and the applicant.

¶10

The counsel for the applicant argues that the version, as stated in the first information report, was reiterated in part by the informant in the trial court. The supplementary affidavit filed today which includes the statement given by the informant before the trial court alleges the commission of offence against Nitin Gopal, however, prima facie the allegation against the applicant are missing, the trial is still going on and only three witnesses have been examined out of the total eleven witnesses, which are proposed to be examined.

¶11

It is argued that the applicant is in detention only on the basis of the confessional statement and even the informant has not supported her version in the first information report through her evidence given in the trial court, which is on record. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and being a lady is in

¶12

detention for more than three and a half years and there is no likelihood of the trail being concluded in near future.

¶13

Learned AGA opposes the bail application by arguing that certain recoveries were made against the applicant, which were supported by confessional statement, as such, the bail application is liable to be rejected.

¶14

Considering the submissions made at the bar, what transpires is that there are as many as eleven witnesses proposed to be examined, the main witness i.e. the informant has not stated anything about the involvement of the applicant with the offence in question and has stated against Nitin Gopal. The pretrial detention cannot continue indefinitely and there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in near future, as such, the applicant being a lady and is in custody since 03.03.2020 and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicant if enlarged on bail can adversely affect the trial, is entitled to be enlarged on bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶15

Let the applicant Muskan be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to her furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned with the following conditions:

¶16

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

¶17

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

¶18

(c) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

Order Date :- 5.7.2023 VNP/-

¶20

Digitally signed by :- VISHVANATH PRASAD SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Muskan v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muskan v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.Home Lko.

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

Raja Alias Shivam Lal Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Salman Vs State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Lko and 3 Others

Jay Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Rishi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Govind Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Vandana Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home