Smt. Meena Devi v. State of U.P

Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49086 of 2023 Applicant :- Smt. Meena Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Chaturvedi,Sangeeta Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vipin Chandra Pandey Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant; Shri Vipin Chandra Pandey, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State. The submission is that co-accused, Rajendra Prasad, has already been enlarged on bail vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 49037 of 2023 on 17.11.2023 and the case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail for the reasons given in bail application of co-accused on the ground of parity. The applicant is in jail since 14.8.2023. On the other hand learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 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. Let the applicant, Smt. Meena Devi, involved in Case Crime No. 546 of 2023, under Sections 498A,304B IPC, and 3/4 of D.P. Act Police Station-Tajganj District-Agra, be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each 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.

¶1The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶2The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶3The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶4That the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any 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 to any police ofÏcer;

¶5The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.

¶6The 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 20.11.2023 Atul kr. sri. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad