Amita Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Allahabad HC4 Sept 2024CRLA/2748/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Appeal No. 2748/2024, the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) considered an application by the appellant for bail enlargement based on her medical condition involving a spinal surgery in 2015. The court recorded that while she has a restricted movement, the complainant's counsel argued the surgery predated the 2018 offence. The court directed the Advocate General to seek instructions

What the court decided

AI extract

Amita Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 11

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2748 of 2024

¶3

Appellant :- Amita Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. Counsel for Appellant :- Veer Bahadur Lal Srivasta,Alok Kumar Mishra,Prateek Tewari,Ratan Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶5

1 . Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents and Shri Shailendra Singh, learned counsel for the complainant.

¶6

Vakalatnama filed by Shri Shailendra Singh, Advocate is taken on record.

¶7

2 . Admit.

¶8

3 . Let trial court record be summoned.

¶9

4 . Contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that by means of the impugned judgment and order dated 14.08.2024, the appellant has been convicted for offence under Sections 498A/34 to undergo imprisonment of 3 years and under Section 304 IPC to undergo imprisonment of 10 years. The appellant is said to have spinal problem and a major surgery took place in the year 2015. Her movements were severely restricted and she is unable to walk alone. It is thus prayed that seeing her medical condition, she may be enlarged on bail.

¶10

5 . On the other hand, Shri Shailendra Singh, learned counsel for the complainant has pointed out that the death of the daughter-in-law of the appellant occurred in the year 2018 and the appellant had been convicted for the said offences and thus the plea being taken for seeking bail of the appellant having had a major surgery of the spinal cord in the year 2015 when did not restrain the appellant for carrying out the offence for which she has been convicted, which has been done in the year 2018, consequently the same cannot be considered for a valid ground for grant of bail.

¶11

6 . Learned A.G.A. may seek instructions regarding medical condition of the appellant within a period of two weeks.

¶12

7 . List thereafter as fresh.

¶13

8 . Whenever the case is next listed, name of Shri Shailendra Singh be shown as Counsel for Respondent.

¶14

Order Date :- 4.9.2024 prateek

¶15

Digitally signed by :- PRATEEK ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Amita Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Amita Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Anil Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Mohd. Gulam Rasool vs State of U.P. Trhu. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Amarjeet Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Sanjay Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and 3 Others

Vipin Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Santosh Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others