Allowed

Salma Kaul @ Shivani v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Apr 2023BAIL/6579/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application bail application contending false implication and pending trial. Court analyzed merit prima facie and granted bail with strict conditions to safeguard interests and ensure presence.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond two sureties each amount conditions including undertaking no adjournments prior evidence appearance trial court proceedings procurement proclamation breach cancella

Salma Kaul @ Shivani Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6579 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Salma Kaul @ Shivani Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Pal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and D.P.S. Chauhan, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This is the second bail application moved on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application was rejected by the co-ordinate Bench (Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal, J') of this Court vide order dated 19.10.2022. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the Court of Hon'ble the Chief Justice vide order dated 05.04.2023 has ordered that "Lay/List before appropriate Court dealing with such matters." and therefore, the second bail application of the applicant has been listed before this Court.

¶7

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive.

¶8

The new ground which has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant is that while rejecting the first bail application this Court had directed the learned trial Court to expedite the trial expeditiously, without granting any unnecessary adjournment, but the same has not been commenced as yet and there is no likelihood of trial to be concluded in near future. Further the applicant is a lady and she is entitled for the benefit under Section 437(ii) Cr.P.C. It is next contended that the applicant has no motive to commit the offence in question. It is further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 8.8.2022.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that coaccused Pramod Kumar who is employer of the applicant has already been enlarged on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 30.01.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application no. 47344 of 2022 and the case of the applicant is on better footing, she is also entitled for bail. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations

¶10

made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that she is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make herself available before the court whenever required. It has been pointed out that the applicant has properly explained the criminal history in paragraph no. 9 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶12

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, considering the facts and circumstances of the fact and also considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, fact that trial is still pending, grant of bail to co-accused, applicant being a lady is in jail since 08.08.2022 and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶13

Let the applicant Salma Kaul @ Shivani involved in Case Crime No. 0385 of 2022, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Gagaha, District Gorakhpur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions.

¶14

(i) 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

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) 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. 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

¶16

Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(iv) 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 him in accordance with law.

¶18

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 applicants to prison.

¶19

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶20

Order Date :- 10.4.2023

¶21

Bhanu

¶22

Digitally signed by :- BHANU PRATAP KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Salma Kaul @ Shivani v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salma Kaul @ Shivani 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lal Bahadur Singh Vs State of U.P.

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

Safat @ Sablu Khan Vs State of U.P.

Mintu Ali Vs State of U.P.

Sani Vs State of U.P.

Manish @ Manvendra Singh Vs State of U.P.