Allowed

Kajal Sharma v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2023BAIL/2721/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 304/201 IPC regarding a death with uncertain cause, the Court granted bail citing jail overcrowding and fundamental right to speedy trial, without deciding on the merits of the case. Conditions for bail include compliance with trial dates and non-interference with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail upon furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding trial attendance and non-obstruction of justice.

Kajal Sharma Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2721 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Kajal Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The first information report was lodged against the unknown accused alleging that dead body of deceased was found in his car. In the post mortem report no injury was found on his body. Subsequently, the statement of one, Sapna, was recorded wherein she has stated that deceased used to come to her house for having sexual relation with her and other ladies. On the fateful day he came and after making physical relation with a lady he fell unconscious. Thereafter she with the help of other co-accused picked up his dead body and kept the same on the back seat of his car. In the post mortem report of the deceased no injury whatsoever was found. The cause of death was uncertain. Viscera was preserved and till date viscera report has not been received. Subsequently implication under Section 304/201 I.P.C has been made.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the deceased died on account of some ailment or after consuming something which may have proved fatal for his life. Applicant has no role in his death. She is in jail sine 23.09.2022 and has no criminal history.

¶8

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant, Kajal Sharma, involved in Case Crime No.371 of 2022, under Sections 304, 201 I.P.C, Police Station Prem Nagar, District- Bareilly

¶11

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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶12

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) 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.

¶13

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

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

¶15

(v) 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.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.

¶17

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶18

Order Date :- 7.2.2023 SS

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SURENDAR SINGH NARANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kajal Sharma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kajal Sharma 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rashid Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Nirdosh Vs State of U.P.

Kailash Vs State of U.P.

Anas @ Aashu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sugriv Vs State of U.P.

Brij Mohan Pandey Vs State of U.P.