Allowed

Meera Srivastava v. State of U.P. Thru.Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Allahabad HC21 Jun 2024BAIL/6597/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application in a case under cheating, forgery and criminal conspiracy provisions of the IPC, arising from an FIR alleging multiple FIRs on similar allegations against the applicant, wife of a co-accused. The court noted prior bail grants in similar cases and released the applicant on bail with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties, subject to six stated conditions.

Meera Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin. Secy. Home… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:43938

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6597 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Meera Srivastava Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru.Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Desh Mitra Anand Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.1557 of 2019, under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station - Gomti Nagar, District - Lucknow, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case and she is in jail since 20.10.2021. He further submits that applicant is the wife of the co-accused and on the same allegations, various F.I.R.'s were lodged. He also submits that applicant was enlarged on bail by this Court in similar cases, i.e. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.5905 of 2024 & Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.44438 of 2022, vide orders dated 30.5.2024 & 12.3.2024, respectively. He further submits that applicant will not involve in any illegal activities in the future. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail, but he does not dispute this fact that applicant has already been enlarged on bail by this Court in similar cases.

¶10

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A., material available on record, contents of F.I.R., other relevant documents, nature of offence as well as

¶11

facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

Let applicant - Meera Srivastava - be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on her furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which she is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which she is suspected.

¶14

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(iv) 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 IPC.

¶17

(v) 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 IPC.

¶18

(vi) 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

¶19

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 her in accordance with law.

¶20

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

¶21

Order Date :- 21.6.2024 Gaurav/-

¶22

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Meera Srivastava v. State of U.P. Thru.Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Meera Srivastava v. State of U.P. Thru.Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. 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

Atul Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow

Ram Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Chhotey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Gulam Mohammad @ Allarakha Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. and 3 Others

Nadeem Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Meera Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.