Allowed

Kallo v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Allahabad HC23 Jan 2023/367/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J. granted bail to the applicant, Kallo, in a criminal case involving sections 302 IPC, applying Section 437 Cr.P.C. despite specific allegations, emphasizing her gender, lack of FIR naming initially, and potential for cooperation in trial.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount.

Kallo Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 11

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 367 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Kallo Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Counsel for Applicant :- O.P. Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶5

Counter and rejoinder affidavits filed by learned counsel for the parties today, the same are taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶7

The present applicant is in jail since 01.11.2022 in FIR/Case Crime No. 456 of 2022, under Sections 302, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Unnao.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has falsely been implicated as she has not committed any offence as alleged. Merely, the allegations have been levelled against the son of the present applicant but in the FIR, she has falsely been implicated and during investigation her husband, namely, Bablu @ Furkan Ali has also been implicated falsely.

¶9

As per allegations made in the FIR, when the deceased was alone at home, co-accused Mannu, who is the main accused, son of the accused-applicant, came and raped her; father of the deceased complained to this fact to the parents of main accused Mannu, then the accused-applicant and her husband came home, tortured and assaulted the deceased; on the next day when the deceased was alone, again co-accused/main-accused Mannu and the present applicant have allegedly came there and assaulted the deceased and thereafter hanged her from a fan, locked the door from the outside and went away.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant is a lady and has not committed any offence as alleged and she is in jail since 01.11.2022, therefore she may be given benefit of Section 437 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel has further drawn attention of the Court towards Annexure no. 12 which is a bail order dated 17.11.2022 passed by this Court in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 9445 of 2022 granting bail to the husband of the present applicant, namely, Bablu @ Furkan Ali, therefore she may be granted bail on the basis of principles of parity.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that however the husband of the present applicant was not named in the FIR but during the investigation similar allegations have been levelled against him also. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history. Chargesheet has been filed. If the present is released on bail, she shall not misuse the liberty granted by this Court, she will cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall abide all the terms and conditions of the bail order.

¶12

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and stated that this is not a case of parity inasmuch as husband of the present applicant is not named in the FIR and the present applicant is named in the FIR. He further stated that specific allegation of torture has been levelled against the present applicant, therefore prayer for bail of the present applicant may be rejected.

¶13

Without entering into the merits of the issue, considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the FIR, the fact that the main accused Mannu is behind the bar, merely allegation has been levelled against the present accused, parents of the main accused have been implicated for the reason that they are parents of the main accused, one of the parents of main accused Bablu @ Furkan Ali has been granted bail, however he was not named in the FIR, the present applicant being a lady may be extended the benefit of Section 437 Cr.P.C. and the fact that chargesheet has been filed, therefore, considering the undertaking of the applicant that she will cooperate in the proceeding and shall not misuse the liberty granted by this Court, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶14

Let the applicant Kallo , involved in aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶16

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law.

¶19

(v) The applicant shall not leave the country without permission of the Court concerned.

¶20

Before parting with it is expected that the trial shall be concluded with expedition. Further, the learned trial court may take all coercive measures as per law if either of the parties do not co-operate in the trial properly. The learned trial court shall fix short dates to ensure that trial is concluded at the earliest.

¶21

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶22

Order Date :- 23.1.2023 kkv/

¶23

Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Kallo v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kallo v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

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

Chaitu Ram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Vinod Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Govt. Lko.

Ajay Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Amjad Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl.. Chie Secy. Home Secrt. Lko. and Another

Sona Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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