Allowed

Santoshi Devi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Aug 2023BAIL/37891/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail allowed in a murder conspiracy case. Court noted appellant was unnamed in initial FIR, lacks motive leading to accusation, has no criminal history. Granted bail citing Article 21 rights, jail overcrowding, and Satendra Kumar Antil precedent without prejudice on merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions regarding court attendance, non-interference with witnesses, and prohibition of adjournments seeking delays du

Santoshi Devi Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:172759

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37891 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Santoshi Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ganesh Datta Sharma,Pankaj Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajay Kumar Pathak

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Kumar Pathak, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

There is allegation against the applicant of committing offence of murder after hatching conspiracy with the co-accused persons.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that initially no one was named in the first information report. After 10 days of the incident minor children of the informant stated before the police that on the fateful date they saw the applicant, her husband, co-accused, Tejveer and co-accused, Manish after beating the deceased being laid on the cot in front of his house in the tin shed. They thought that deceased uncle, Ashok, was in drunk condition and therefore, applicant was not named in the first information report. It has come in the statement of the witnesses that the deceased had illicit relation with the wife of the informant, Maya Devi and therefore, informant himself killed the deceased and got the applicant and her husband implicated who are their collaterals. There is land dispute between them. He has submitted that no motive has been assigned to the applicant and her husband for causing murder of the deceased. Applicant is in jail since 15.05.2023 and has no criminal history to her credit.

¶9

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

¶10

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.

¶11

Let the applicant, Santoshi Devi , involved in Case Crime No.48 of 2023, under Sections 302, 120B I.P.C, Police Station Sadabad, District- Hathras 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

¶12

be verified.

¶13

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

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

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.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 28.8.2023 SS

¶21

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

Santoshi Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santoshi Devi 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

Dharampal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Sabittra Devi @ Savitri Devi Vs State of U.P.

Gangesh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rohit Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Satish Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shahrukh Vs State of U.P.