Allowed

Smt Babita and 6 Others v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Feb 2023BAIL/7597/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under the Gangster Act, the court allowed the release of seven applicants who are indigent, dependent family members, and have identically placed co-accused Satpal released by a coordinate bench. The court observed they have a better footing than co-accused and trial may take time.

What did the court decide?

The seven applicants be released on personal bond and two sureties each, subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence and sincere cooperation in trial.

Smt Babita and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 47

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7597 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Smt Babita And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Kumar Upadhyay,Anand Prakash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. on behalf of State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants, with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 0481 of 2022, under Section 2/3 Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Kandhla, District Shamli, during pendency of trial.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He further submits that the applicants have been enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 131 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 504, 34 IPC by the co-ordinate Benches of this court vide orders dated 30.09.2022 and 07.06.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Applications No. 38916 of 2021 and 36850 of 2021. The provision of Gangster Act has been invoked on the strength of a single case. He next argued that identically placed co-accused Satpal has been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 08.12.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 56093 of 2022. Thus case of the applicant is on better footing than that of co-accused. He further submits that all the applicants are from a single family and all the applicants are in jail and there is no one in the family to look after the children and elders. The applicants are in jail since 19.01.2023. In case, the applicants are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶8

On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicants are involved in Case Crime No. 131 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 504, 34 IPC in a case of murder hence, therefore, the bail application of the applicants may be rejected.

¶9

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, I find that applicants have been enlarged on bail in main case and all the applicants are from a single family; there is no one in the family to look after the children and elders; identically placed co-accused Satpal has been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 08.12.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 56093 of 2022 and prima facie the case of the applicant is on better footing than that of co-accused; it may take some time to conclude the trial. Therefore, there is no point of keeping the applicant in jail during the pendency of the trial. Therefore, the bail application is allowed.

¶10

Observation made by this court while deciding the present bail application are prima facie in nature and shall have no bearing on the trial of the case.

¶11

Let the applicants, Smt. Babita, Smt. Usha, Kiran, Vikas, Suraj, Sanjiv and Romeo be released on bail on their 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 be verified.

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

Order Date :- 17.2.2023 Ujjawal

¶16

Digitally signed by :- UJJAWAL PARJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt Babita and 6 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Babita and 6 Others 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

Deepak Baisoya Vs State of U.P.

Nitin Vs State of U.P.

Deenbandhu Tiwari and Another Vs State of U.P.

Atiq Vs State of U.P.

Mohd Samar Vs State of U.P.

Aale Hasan Vs State of U.P.