Sunita Devi v. State of U.P

Court No. - 75 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51022 of 2023 Applicant :- Sunita Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Raj Kumar Kesari Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma,J.

¶1Heard Sri Satyendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Raj Kumar Kesari learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records.

¶2The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 193 of 2023, under Sections 363, 311, 370 (5) I.P.C., Police Station-Bhelupur, District-Varanasi, during pendency of the trial.

¶3Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant is a lady and has not been named in the F.I.R., her name came into light in the statement of the co-accused. The abductee has not been recovered from or on the pointing of the applicant. It is next contended that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant. It is next contended that co-accused, Mahesh Rana and Manish Jain, having identical role, have been granted bail by this Court in Crl. Misc. Bail Application Nos. 47898 of 2023 and 40142 of 2023 vide orders 21.11.2023 and 8.11.2023 respectively. The applicant has no criminal history she is in jail since 23.05.2023, in case, she is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶4Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶5Having regard to the submissions made above and the fact that the applicant has remained confined for more than six months, co-accused persons having been granted bail and after submission of the charge-sheet 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 applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial 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.

¶6Let the applicant, Sunita Devi, involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on her 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 applicant shall not temper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶7In 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 :- 12.12.2023 S.Verma High Court of Judicature at Allahabad