Allowed

Ruby v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC22 Oct 2024/11130/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bench allowed bail to applicant Ruby, a nurse accused under IPC 370(4), noting her innocence plea, lack of prior record, and that a similarly situated co-accused was already released on bail. Bail granted on personal and two sureties bond with specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in like amount to the court's satisfaction.

Ruby Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:71016

¶2

Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11130 of 2024 Applicant :- Ruby Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Alishah Faruqi,Azizullah Khan,Obaidullah Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶5

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release her on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 278 of 2024, under sections 370(4) of IPC, P.S.- Kotwali Shahabad District - Hardoi.

¶6

The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the present applicant is a Nurse/Dai and she had no role to commit any offence as is alleged in the first information report. He added that the identically situated co-accused namely, Tabrej Khan has already been enlarged on bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8693 of 2024 vide order dated 16.10.2024. He next submits that the role of the present applicant is rather on better footings and the applicant is a women and she is languishing in jail since 14.6.2024. He added that the applicant has no previous criminal history as is mentioned in paragraph no. 4 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and she undertakes that in case, she is granted bail, she will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶7

Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid on merits, but he could not dispute the fact that the co-accused who is on identically footings has already been enlarged on bail.

¶8

Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is languishing in jail since 14.6.2024; the identically situated coaccused namely, Tabrej Khan has already been enlarged on bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8693 of 2024 vide order dated 16.10.2024; the applicant has no previous criminal history as is mentioned in paragraph no. 4 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, she is granted bail, she will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the

¶9

trial proceedings.

¶10

Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.

¶11

Let the applicant- Ruby involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-

¶12

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶13

(2) 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. She 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;

¶14

(3) 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.; and

¶15

(4) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

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

¶17

It is clarified that the observations 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 merits of the case.

¶18

Order Date :- 22.10.2024/Mayank

¶19

Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ruby v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ruby v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sahjad @ Aughad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Nanhkau @ Rajkumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Shameen Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Sabaan vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home Department Civil Secretariat, Lucknow

Ruby vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Sukesh Rajan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P.