Nanhu And Another v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

: Anoop Srivastava, Smriti : G.A. Court No. - 9 HON'BLE RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J. HON'BLE ABDHESH KUMAR CHAUDHARY, J. (Order on I.A. / C.M.A. No. 1 of 2024 i.e. Bail Application)

1. Heard Ms. Smriti, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anirudh Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State.

2. At the very outset Ms. Smriti has stated that the bail appliation on behalf of applicant no. 1 'Nanhu' may be permitted to be not pressed at this stage and liberty may be granted to file another bail application on his behalf.

3. Considering the request of learned counsel for the appellants the bail application on behalf of 'Nanhu' is dismissed being not pressed with the aforesaid liberty.

4. This is first bail application of the applicant-Ruby in Session Trial No. 311 of 2015, State Vs. Nanhu and others arising out of Case Crime No. 38 of 2014, P.S. Makhi, District Unnao wherein the appellant/applicant has been convicted under Sections 302 / 149 IPC and sentenced for maximum punishment of life imprisonment with fine stipulations. 2 CRLA No. 3167 of 2024

5. Ms. Smriti has stated that since the appellant / applicant Ruby was not implicated in the charge-sheet and was summoned by the learned trial court invoking the powers under section 319 Cr.P.C., therefore, she surrendered before the learned trial court and got bail within short span of time. Presently she is in jail w.e.f. 3.8.2024. Ms. Smriti has stated that since the allegations against the present appellant were false and misconceived, therefore, during the course of investigation no charge-sheet was filed against her. Though no credible or incriminating material has been found against her but on the basis of statement / evidence of the co-convicts and witnesses she has been summoned u/s 319 Cr.P.C. Even if the prosecution story is taken on its face value, the present applicant / appellant has not committed any offence except the fact of the prosecution that she was living in her paternal place and her husband (deceased) came to her place to bring her back to his home and he died in her place under mysterious circumstances. Since the cause of death could not be ascertained, his viscera was preserved. As per the chemical examination report of the viscera the poisonous content i.e. DDVP insecticide was found and as per the evidence of Dr. Jagdish Singh Randhawa, P.W.-7 is a poisonous content. Doctor has also opined that the cause of death may be on account of consuming the spurious liquor. Since no material or evidence was found against the present appellant, therefore, she was convicted u/s 302 read with section 149 IPC. Section 149 IPC defines - common object to commit the offence and in this case there is no common object to kill her husband with the help of her family members.

6. Since the facts and circumstances of the issue in question was peculiar as the deceased died in place of his in-laws where his wife along with her family members were residing, therefore, the presumption u/s 106 of Evidence Act has been drawn against the present appellant and other co- convicts. Ms. Smriti has stated that there are so many contradictions in the prosecution story which although has been considered by the learned trial court but the findings thereon has not been returned properly, therefore, Ms. Smriti has stated that in view of the present facts and circumstances the present applicant / appellant may be enlarged on bail.

7. Per contra, Sri Anirudh Kumar Singh, learned AGA has opposed the aforesaid bail application by submitting that the present applicant / appellant was living at her paternal place and was not willing to come with her 3 CRLA No. 3167 of 2024 husband and when her husband (deceased) came to her place to bring her back to his place she with the help of his family members committed the crime in question. He has further submitted that her husband had come to know about the fact that his wife is having relation with one person with whom she had gone on motorcycle on that day before the alleged incident, therefore, he had come to her place to bring her back to his house. On being confronted on the point that initially no allegation was levelled against the present appellant and no incriminating material was found against her, therefore, no charge-sheet was filed and she has been implicated only after summoning u/s 319 Cr.P.C., learned AGA has stated that all the aforesaid points would be argued at the time of final argument of the appeal.

8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties; the material available on record and without entering into the merits of the appeal; considering the fact that the present appellant is a lady; no charge-sheet was filed against her; she was summoned by the trial court u/s 319 Cr.P.C.; no incriminating material or evidence was found on her pointing out suggesting her culpability in the offence in question and the death of the husband of the present appellant was mysterious inasmuch as it is not clear as to whether he died on account of consuming any poisonous content or on account of consuming spurious liquor and his / her undertaking that he / she shall not misuse the liberty of bail; we are hereby convinced that she may be enlarged on bail.

9. Accordingly, the bail application is disposed of.

10. Let the appellant- Ruby, convict of the aforesaid sessions trial, 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.

11. The fine imposed by the learned Trial Court shall remain stayed.

12. It is made clear that during bail, if the appellant commits any offence, the prosecution will be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.

13. As soon as personal bonds and sureties are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the Trial Court concerned to be kept on record of this appeal. 4 CRLA No. 3167 of 2024

14. Office is directed to prepare the paper-book of the case, if not already prepared and supply a copy of the same to the learned counsel for the parties as per rules.

15. List this appeal for final hearing in the month of January, 2026. (Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) November 24, 2025 Om

: Anoop Srivastava, Smriti : G.A. Court No. - 9 HON'BLE RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J. HON'BLE ABDHESH KUMAR CHAUDHARY, J. (Order on I.A. / C.M.A. No. 1 of 2024 i.e. Bail Application)

1. Heard Ms. Smriti, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anirudh Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State.

2. At the very outset Ms. Smriti has stated that the bail appliation on behalf of applicant no. 1 'Nanhu' may be permitted to be not pressed at this stage and liberty may be granted to file another bail application on his behalf.

3. Considering the request of learned counsel for the appellants the bail application on behalf of 'Nanhu' is dismissed being not pressed with the aforesaid liberty.

4. This is first bail application of the applicant-Ruby in Session Trial No. 311 of 2015, State Vs. Nanhu and others arising out of Case Crime No. 38 of 2014, P.S. Makhi, District Unnao wherein the appellant/applicant has been convicted under Sections 302 / 149 IPC and sentenced for maximum punishment of life imprisonment with fine stipulations. 2 CRLA No. 3167 of 2024

5. Ms. Smriti has stated that since the appellant / applicant Ruby was not implicated in the charge-sheet and was summoned by the learned trial court invoking the powers under section 319 Cr.P.C., therefore, she surrendered before the learned trial court and got bail within short span of time. Presently she is in jail w.e.f. 3.8.2024. Ms. Smriti has stated that since the allegations against the present appellant were false and misconceived, therefore, during the course of investigation no charge-sheet was filed against her. Though no credible or incriminating material has been found against her but on the basis of statement / evidence of the co-convicts and witnesses she has been summoned u/s 319 Cr.P.C. Even if the prosecution story is taken on its face value, the present applicant / appellant has not committed any offence except the fact of the prosecution that she was living in her paternal place and her husband (deceased) came to her place to bring her back to his home and he died in her place under mysterious circumstances. Since the cause of death could not be ascertained, his viscera was preserved. As per the chemical examination report of the viscera the poisonous content i.e. DDVP insecticide was found and as per the evidence of Dr. Jagdish Singh Randhawa, P.W.-7 is a poisonous content. Doctor has also opined that the cause of death may be on account of consuming the spurious liquor. Since no material or evidence was found against the present appellant, therefore, she was convicted u/s 302 read with section 149 IPC. Section 149 IPC defines - common object to commit the offence and in this case there is no common object to kill her husband with the help of her family members.

6. Since the facts and circumstances of the issue in question was peculiar as the deceased died in place of his in-laws where his wife along with her family members were residing, therefore, the presumption u/s 106 of Evidence Act has been drawn against the present appellant and other co- convicts. Ms. Smriti has stated that there are so many contradictions in the prosecution story which although has been considered by the learned trial court but the findings thereon has not been returned properly, therefore, Ms. Smriti has stated that in view of the present facts and circumstances the present applicant / appellant may be enlarged on bail.

7. Per contra, Sri Anirudh Kumar Singh, learned AGA has opposed the aforesaid bail application by submitting that the present applicant / appellant was living at her paternal place and was not willing to come with her 3 CRLA No. 3167 of 2024 husband and when her husband (deceased) came to her place to bring her back to his place she with the help of his family members committed the crime in question. He has further submitted that her husband had come to know about the fact that his wife is having relation with one person with whom she had gone on motorcycle on that day before the alleged incident, therefore, he had come to her place to bring her back to his house. On being confronted on the point that initially no allegation was levelled against the present appellant and no incriminating material was found against her, therefore, no charge-sheet was filed and she has been implicated only after summoning u/s 319 Cr.P.C., learned AGA has stated that all the aforesaid points would be argued at the time of final argument of the appeal.

8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties; the material available on record and without entering into the merits of the appeal; considering the fact that the present appellant is a lady; no charge-sheet was filed against her; she was summoned by the trial court u/s 319 Cr.P.C.; no incriminating material or evidence was found on her pointing out suggesting her culpability in the offence in question and the death of the husband of the present appellant was mysterious inasmuch as it is not clear as to whether he died on account of consuming any poisonous content or on account of consuming spurious liquor and his / her undertaking that he / she shall not misuse the liberty of bail; we are hereby convinced that she may be enlarged on bail.

9. Accordingly, the bail application is disposed of.

10. Let the appellant- Ruby, convict of the aforesaid sessions trial, 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.

11. The fine imposed by the learned Trial Court shall remain stayed.

12. It is made clear that during bail, if the appellant commits any offence, the prosecution will be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.

13. As soon as personal bonds and sureties are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the Trial Court concerned to be kept on record of this appeal. 4 CRLA No. 3167 of 2024

14. Office is directed to prepare the paper-book of the case, if not already prepared and supply a copy of the same to the learned counsel for the parties as per rules.

15. List this appeal for final hearing in the month of January, 2026. (Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) November 24, 2025 Om