Rubina Begum vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:33817

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8160 of 2025

Applicant :- Rubina Begum Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhijit Mishra,Vivek Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Abhijit Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Kunwar Tejandra Bahadur, learned AGA for the State.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 267 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 61(2) B.N.S., Police Station Nababganj, District Farrukhabad during pendency of the trial.

¶8

FIR of the present case was lodged on 22.12.2024 against applicant and co-accused Faim Khan and according to the FIR on 20.12.2024 father of the informant had gone towards the field but he did not return and on 21.12.2024 his dead body was found in the field. It is further mentioned in the FIR that applicant who was wife of the brother of the informant after his death developed illicit relationship with co-accused Faim Khan and she was daughter-inlaw of the deceased and she used to make quarrel from him with regard to piece of land and only due to this reason she along with co-accused Faim Khan committed his murder.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits, applicant is daughterin-law of the deceased and on the basis of suspicion, informant lodged FIR of the present case against applicant and co-accused Faim Khan.

¶10

He further submits, except suspicion and motive with regard to piece of land, there is no other evidence against the applicant on record. He further submits, applicant is a lady and she is not having any criminal history and in the present matter she is in jail since 22.12.2024.

¶11

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

¶12

the applicant.

¶13

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶14

However, applicant is daughter-in-law of the deceased but it is a case of circumstantial evidence and it reflects, except the motive with regard to piece of land and suspicion there is no other evidence against the applicant on record.

¶15

Further, applicant is a lady and she is not having any criminal history and in the present matter she is in jail since 22.12.2024.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

Let the applicant - Rubina Begum 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:-

¶19

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

¶20

(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.

¶21

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

¶22

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.

¶23

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.

¶24

Order Date :- 7.3.2025 AK Pandey

¶25

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

Rubina Begum v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rubina Begum 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

Phool Chandra Alias Gangu vs State of U.P. and Another

Jay Kumar vs State of U.P.

Rustam vs State of U.P.

Vishal Kumar vs State of U.P. Though It Principal Secretary (Home)Lucknow

Parvez Alias Ishtiyaq Ali vs State of U.P.

Rahul vs State of U.P.