Pooja vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:36961

Court No. - 64

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3573 of 2025

Applicant :- Pooja Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Haseeb Alam Ansari,Kamalvesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Haseeb Alam Ansari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.D. Ojha, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Pooja , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 280 of 2024, under Sections 85, 61(2), 80 B.N.S. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Harpur Budhat, District Gorakhpur.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant is the sister-in-law (nand) of the deceased Priti Nishad. It is further submitted that general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant and all the accused persons. It is submitted that the postmortem examination report of the deceased shows that the body has received a single ligature mark on it. The cause of death has been opined as asphyxia due to antemortem hanging. It is submitted that there is no other bodily injury on the body of the deceased. It is submitted that Kanhaiya Lal the husband of the deceased is in jail. Further while placing paragraph 22 of the affidavit it is submitted that the applicant is 21 years of age and is at the age of marriage. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 26 and is in jail since 19.11.2024.

¶10

Per contra, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named in the first information report along with other accused persons and there are

¶11

allegations against her.

¶12

After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is apparent that the applicant is an unmarried girl. She is the nand of the deceased. General and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant and other accused persons in the first information report. The husband of the deceased is in jail. The cause of death of the deceased is asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging.

¶13

Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶14

Let the applicant- Pooja , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶16

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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.

¶18

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under section 84 B.N.S.S., 2023 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 209 B.N.S., 2023.

¶19

(v) 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 351 B.N.S.S.,

¶20

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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 B.N.S., 2023.

¶21

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶22

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶23

The bail application is allowed .

¶24

Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶25

Order Date :- 17.3.2025 AS Rathore

¶26

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶27

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pooja v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pooja 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

Kalawati vs State of U.P.

Sudhir Kumar Tomar vs State of U.P.

Sayed Mohammad Saeed vs State of U.P. and Another

Akash Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Belal Ahmad and 3 Others vs State of Up and Another

Mohd Javed and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another