Criminal Court granted bail to Smt. Anjana @ Gudiya in a murder case under Section 302 IPC. The release order was issued without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, citing jail overcrowding and citing Satendra Kumar Antil case.
Release on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties in like amount subject to strict conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Reserved on 28.2.2023 Delivered on 03.3.2023
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 59802 of 2022
Applicant :- Smt. Anjana @ Gudiya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Adesh Kumar,Sunil Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shiv Sharan Tripathi
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Sri J.P. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Shiv Sharan Tripathi, learned counsel for the informant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Smt. Anjana @ Gudiya, with a prayer to release her on bail in Case Crime No. 23 of 2022, under Sections 302, 201/34 IPC, Police Station Gabhana, DistrictAligarh, during pendency of trial.
There is allegation in the FIR that elder brother of the informant, Pushpendra Pratap Gahrana, lived with his wife, Smt. Anjana @ Gudiya and son and daughter aged about 4-12 years in Aligarh for last two years. The dispute was going on between his brother and sister-in-law ( Bhabhi ), the applicant. His sister-in-law has filed case against his brother in court which is pending. She has illicit relationship with other men, which was opposed by the deceased. On 27/28.1.2022 his sister-in-law with the help of her unknown companions caused the murder of his brother and thrown his dead in Gabhana area. Gabhana police has prepared inquest report and got post mortem of the dead body of the deceased done.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case by the brother of the deceased on the basis of the statements of the children recorded on 17.2.2022, when the incident took place on 27/28.1.2022. The recovery of piece of brick and her mobile phone has been made and she has been implicated on the basis of her confessional statement. The informant is not the eye-witness of the incident. It is a case of circumstantial evidence. The children of the applicant were tutored after she was sent in jail on 30.1.2022. Nothing has been stated in the FIR regarding the nature of cases filed by the applicant against the deceased. The informant wanted to grab the property of his brother and therefore he has
caused the murder of the husband of the applicant and falsely implicated her. She has no criminal history to her credit. Her children have been influenced by the informant and they have falsely given statements against her. The trial against the applicant has begun and PW-1, PW-2 and PW-3 have been examined before the court below.
Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, she does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail she will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, judgement dated 11.7.2022 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime 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 that :-
(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.
(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 her absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(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 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.
(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
2 of 3
be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law.
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
The court below is directed to conclude the trial against the applicant, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order
Order Date :- 03.3.2023
Ruchi Agrahari
3 of 3
Digitally signed by :- RUCHI AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant involved in the offence of murder is entitled to bail on furnishing personal bond and sureties considering overcrowding in jails.
Whether the applicant can be released on bail despite the pendency of trial in a prosecution for Sections 302, 201/34 IPC.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & AnotherDistinguished¶11
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, judgement dated 11.7.2022
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Smt. Anjana @ Gudiya
State of U.P.
Siddharth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
