Allowed

Maharani Devi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC30 Nov 2023BAIL/43103/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed bail to the applicant, Maharani Devi, citing parity with a co-accused and overcrowding in jails under Article 21, directing her release on bond with sureties subject to specific conditions regarding trial attendance and behavior, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions ensuring no tampering with evidence, sincere cooperation, absence of criminal activity, and presence at trial cou

Maharani Devi Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:225750

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43103 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Maharani Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Singh,Jitendra Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

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

¶7

Personal afÏdavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.

¶8

Explanation given in the personal afÏdavit appears to be sufÏcient in compliance of the order of this court dated 18.10.2023.

¶9

The submission is that co-accused, Santram @ Shanti Swaroop, has already been enlarged on bail vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 39522 of 2023 on 3.10.2023 and the case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail for the reasons given in bail application of coaccused on the ground of parity. The applicant is in jail since 25.6.2023.

¶10

On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the 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.

¶12

Let the applicant, Maharani Devi, involved in Case Crime No. 114 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 304-B IPC and section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Deoria Kalan District- Pilibhit, 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

¶13

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

¶14

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶15

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶16

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶17

That 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 ofÏcer;

¶18

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.

¶19

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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶21

Order Date :- 30.11.2023 Atul kr. sri.

¶22

Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Maharani Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maharani 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

Muinuddeen Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Kumar Patel Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Abhishek Vs State of U.P.

Ritesh Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Akash Thakur Vs State of U.P.

Priya Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others