Hausala Devi vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:48851

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10504 of 2025

Applicant :- Hausala Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Suresh Dhar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Suresh Dhar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vijay Kumar, learned AGA-I for the Staterespondent.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 15 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 103(1), 3(5) BNS, Police Station- Mirzapur, DistrictShahjahanpur, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that however, as per allegation made in the FIR, applicant along with her husband and father committed the murder of brother-in-law of the informant but admittedly, informant of the case is not the eye-witness.

¶9

He further submitted that however, during investigation, when statements of witnesses Shivram and Ram Pratap were recorded then they claimed themselves to be eye-witnesses but from their statements, which have been annexed along with the instant bail application, it reflects that they did not attribute the role of causing fire-arm injury to the deceased and from their statements, it reflects that role of causing fire arm injury to the deceased has been assigned to co-accused Bacchu.

¶10

He further submitted that applicant is lady and she is not having any criminal history and she is in jail in the present matter since 23.01.2025.

¶11

Per contra, learned AGA however, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

¶13

record of the case.

¶14

However, applicant is named in the FIR and as per allegation, she along with her husband and father committed the murder of brother-in-law of the informant but admittedly informant of the case is not the eye-witness.

¶15

From the record, it also reflects, Shivram and Ram Pratap are the two eye-witnesses but from their statements, it could not be reflected, applicant caused any injury to the deceased.

¶16

Further, applicant is lady and she is not having any criminal history and she is in jail in the present matter since 23.01.2025.

¶17

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶18

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶19

Let the applicant- Hausala Devi be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶20

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶21

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

¶22

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶23

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶24

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶25

Order Date :- 5.4.2025/KK Patel

¶26

Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Hausala Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hausala Devi v. State of U.P.

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

Anil Yadav vs State of U.P.

Dwarika Prasad Jha vs State of U.P.

Sandeep Shukla vs State of U.P.

Shakib Alias Sakib vs State of U.P.

Yashpal vs State of U.P.

Rajan vs State of U.P.