Allowed

Smt. Gudiya and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 May 2023BAIL/10853/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 10853 of 2023, this Court allowed bail to the applicants, ladies accused of causing hurt and criminal intimidation. The Court granted bail without expressing an opinion on the merits, observing that no specific role was assigned to the female appellants and they had no prior criminal history.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to standard bail conditions.

Smt. Gudiya and Another Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10853 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Gudiya And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ayank Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant in Case Crime No. 191 of 2022, under Section 304, 323, 504, 506 of IPC, Police Station Tiwaripur, District Gorakhpur with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶7

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent ladies and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that this is a counter blast case and F.I.R. has been lodged from both the sides against each other. It is further submitted that initially first information report under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. being Case Crime No. 190 of 2022 was lodged by applicant No. 1 Gudiya Devi against complainant, his son and other persons. It is further submitted that first information report of the same incident was lodged by the complainant's side after a delay of one day and no explanation has been given in this regard. It is further submitted that no specific role has been assigned to the applicants. It is further submitted that informant in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.PC. has assigned specific role of causing head injury by bricks to the co-accused Anil. It is further submitted that applicants are languishing in jail since 25.10.2022 having no criminal history and that in case they are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶8

Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspect of the matter.

¶9

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of evidence, all attending facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that

¶10

applicants are ladies and no specific role has been assigned to them, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant Smt. Gudiya and Sheetal in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶12

(1). The applicants will not tamper with the prosecution evidence during the trial.

¶13

(2). The applicants will not influence any witness.

¶14

(3). The applicants will appear before the trial Court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶15

(4). The applicants 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 5.5.2023 AKT

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Gudiya and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Gudiya and Another 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

Pankaj @ Chhotu Vs State of U.P.

Amit Katheriya @ Sintoo Vs State of U.P.

Prashant Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bhagat Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Munish Alias Muneshwar Vs State of U.P.

Shakir Vs State of U.P.