Baili Devi and Another v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38287 of 2023 Applicant :- Baili Devi And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Patsy David,Mary Puncha (Sheeb Jose),Mohd. Kalim Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit filed by the State, is taken on record.

¶2Heard counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶3The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicants on bail in Case Crime No. 355 of 2023, under Sections 295-A, 505(2), 504 I.P.C. & section 3, 5(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, Police Station-Deogaon, District-Azamgarh, during pendency of the trial.

¶4Counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicants neither persuaded nor converted any individual to another faith. There is no independent witness to the alleged incident. At present, there is no evidence to link the applicants with the offence. It is next contended that identically placed co-accused Prema Devi, Kusumkala and Basantu have been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 38693 of 2023 vide order dated 27.09.2023. The applicants claim parity. The applicants are in jail since 30.07.2023 having no criminal history and in case they are enlarged on bail, they will not misuse the said liberty.

¶5Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶6Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that there is no independent witness to the alleged incident. Identically placed co-accused Prema Devi, Kusumkala and Basantu have been granted bail by this Court. At present there is no substantive evidence against the applicant. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. Further the applicants have remained confined for more than three months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicants, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶7Let the applicants-Baili Devi and Mahendra Prasad involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicants shall not temper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicants shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicants shall appear on each and every date fixed by trial court.

¶8In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 31.10.2023 Lbm/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad