Km. Vinesh vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:100338

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17756 of 2025

Applicant :- Km. Vinesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anshu Singh,Hemendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Akshay Pratap Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Hemendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Saurabh Kesarwani, learned counsel for informant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶7

There are allegations against the 18 persons in the FIR of committing offence of attempt to murder and other offences against two persons who are father and son.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is an unmarried girl. She has been falsely implicated generally and not assigned any specific role.

¶9

The applicant is in jail since 24.03.2025 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶10

On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant- Km. Vinesh , involved in Case Crime No. 66 of 2025 , under Sections 109(1), 191(2), 191(3), 190 B.N.S., Police Station- Ahmadgarh, District- Bulandshahr, be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each

¶13

in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶14

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶15

(ii) 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. 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

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(iv) 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 then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against her in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(v) 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. If 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.

¶19

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

¶20

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶21

Order Date :- 27.6.2025 P. Pandey

¶22

Digitally signed by :- PUSHPENDRA PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Km. Vinesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Km. Vinesh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ankit Sahni vs State of U.P.

Shubham vs State of U.P.

Smt. Pawni Sharma vs State of U.P.

Pankaj Singh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

X Juvenile vs State of U.P. and Another

Kajal vs State of U.P.