Smt. Nageena Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:194128

Court No. - 69

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6418 of 2023

Applicant :- Smt. Nageena Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Namit Srivastava

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

1. List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Surendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vishesh Upadhyay, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Namit Srivastava, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Devendra Nath Mishra, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

This is the second bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the applicant- Smt. Nageena, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 406 of 2020, under Sections 302, 120B I.P.C. registered at P.S. Kotwali Kalpi, District Jalaun.

¶9

The first bail application of the applicant being Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.24173 of 2021 (Smt. Nageena vs. State of U.P.) was rejected by this Court vide order dated 09.8.2021.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant while producing the order of co-accused Mohammad Javed Khan dated 23.1.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 25030 of 2021, has argued that after rejection of first bail of the applicant, coaccused-Mohammad Javed Khan has been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court, copy of the said order is taken on record. It is argued that case of the applicant stands on a better footing than that of Mohammad Javed Khan who has been granted bail. It is argued that looking to the same, the applicant who is lady and is entitled to the benefit of Section 437 Cr.P.C. and her being in jail since 25.11.2020, is also entitled for bail.

¶11

Per contra, learned State counsel and learned counsel for the first informant although opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument that co-accused Mohammad Javed Khan has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this

¶12

Court and also that case of the applicant stands on a better footing than that of co-accused Mohammad Javed Khan who has been granted bail inasmuch as weapon of murder was recovered from the said co-accused and even blood stained T- Shirt was recovered on his pointing out.

¶13

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is lady. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected vide order dated 09.8.2021. Subsequently, co-accused Mohammad Javed Khan from whose possession weapon of murder and blood stained T-shirt have been recovered, has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, a case for bail is made out in favour of the applicant.

¶14

Let the applicant- Smt. Nageena, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶16

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶18

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C.

¶19

(V) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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

¶20

be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC.

¶21

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶22

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶23

The bail application is allowed.

¶24

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶25

Order Date :- 9.10.2023 Naresh

¶26

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

Smt. Nageena v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Nageena v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indrajeet Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Prajapati Vs State of U.P.

Guddu Alias Saeed Vs State of U.P.

Vikesh @ Vikas Vs State of U.P.

Mahendra and Another Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Yadav Vs State of U.P.