Reeta Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:85929

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13323 of 2024

Applicant :- Reeta Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

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. 375 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 143(2) B.N.S. and 81 of Juvenile Justice Act, Police Station- Dargah Shareef, District- Bahraich.

¶9

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 applicant is a woman and she was never involved in committing the offence. He added that the police has failed to collect cogent piece of evidence so as to connect the applicant with the instant matter. He also submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and she is languishing in jail since 30.10.2024. Further submitted that the applicant undertakes that in case, she is granted bail, she will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶10

Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant was involved in committing the aforesaid offence and thus, she is not entitled for any relief.

¶11

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 30.10.2024; the applicant is a woman; there is no previous criminal history of the applicant coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that if she is granted bail, she will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶12

Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides,

¶13

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.

¶14

Let the applicant- Reeta Devi involved in the aforementioned 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:-

¶15

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

¶16

(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. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶17

(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

¶18

(4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

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.

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 20.12.2024 Shravan

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Reeta Devi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reeta Devi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ajay Kumar Jha and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Monu Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Anil Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Shures Varma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Amit Kumar Shukla and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Reeta Devi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko