High Court

Applicant :- Shobha Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Bhawan Yadav,Ramakar Shukla,Vikas Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Firoz Ahmad Khan Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

1. Heard Sri Ramakar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ravi Srivastava, learned AGA for the State and Sri Firoz Ahmad Khan, learned counsel for the informant.

2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Shobha Devi) is languishing in jail since 30.03.2024 in Case Crime No.0215 of 2022 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 504 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Bikapur, District -Faizabad (Now Ayodhya). She has been falsely implicated in this case as she has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that though the present applicant was named in the FIR but during investigation her complicity was not found therefore final report was filed in her favour. However, during course of trial and on the basis of the statements of the witnesses, the present applicant has been summoned by the learned trial court under Section 319 Cr.P.C.. Learned counsel has stated that those persons who have been alleged as eye witnesses are not the eye witness as their statements have been shown to the Court which have been enclosed with the bail application. Learned counsel for the applicant has shown the statement of Kamlesh Kumari, mother of the deceased, during course of cross examination, she has categorically stated that all accused persons were beating her son mercilessly through sharp edged weapons i.e. Kulhari, Fawda and Gadala however, co-accused Shobha (the present applicant), Sushma and Vandana were beating the deceased through brick (Eent/gumma). Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the weapons used in the commission of crime have been recovered on the pointing out of the co-accused Mohan,whose bail application has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 03.04.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 9477 of 2023. He has also stated that one co- accused Sushma has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 26.04.2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 9700 of 2022. The role of co-accused Sushma is at par with the present applicant. Sri Ramakar Shukla has stated that almost all fact witnesses have been examined and if the present applicant is released on bail she would not be able to influence any relevant/fact witness. He has further submitted that the dispute in question is an outcome of property dispute wherein the entire family of the present applicant has been implicated. Sri Shukla has drawn attention of this Court towards the dictums of Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Gokarakonda Naga Saibaba vs. State of Maharashtra, wherein, the Apex Court has observed that if all material witnesses have already been examined and cross examined, the bail application of the accused person may be considered. Besides the present applicant is a lady, therefore she may be given the benefit of Section 437 Cr.P.C (480 BNSS). The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever and if she is released on bail, she shall abide by all terms and condition of the bail order and shall cooperate in the trial properly.

4. Learned AGA and counsel for the informant have opposed the bail application vehemently and have submitted that all the accused persons have beaten the deceased mercilessly and on account of ante-mortem injuries, the deceased died.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that the present applicant is a lady and having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever; and the undertaking that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the present applicant may be enlarged on bail.

6. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

7. Let the applicant (Shobha Devi) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer to cooperate in the investigation and shall further remain present to cooperate in the investigation as and when the Investigating Team calls her to appear and if the charge-sheet is filed against her she shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly and shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when 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. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC/208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) The 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./351 of B.N.S.S., 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

10. Before parting with learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial by fixing short dates taking recourse of Section 309 Cr.P.C. without giving any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties.

11. It is made clear that since the present applicant has been granted bail considering the fact that she is a lady, therefore, the other co-accused may not seek pairity with the present applicant. Order Date :- 10.3.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.)

Applicant :- Shobha Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Bhawan Yadav,Ramakar Shukla,Vikas Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Firoz Ahmad Khan Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

1. Heard Sri Ramakar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ravi Srivastava, learned AGA for the State and Sri Firoz Ahmad Khan, learned counsel for the informant.

2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Shobha Devi) is languishing in jail since 30.03.2024 in Case Crime No.0215 of 2022 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 504 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Bikapur, District -Faizabad (Now Ayodhya). She has been falsely implicated in this case as she has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that though the present applicant was named in the FIR but during investigation her complicity was not found therefore final report was filed in her favour. However, during course of trial and on the basis of the statements of the witnesses, the present applicant has been summoned by the learned trial court under Section 319 Cr.P.C.. Learned counsel has stated that those persons who have been alleged as eye witnesses are not the eye witness as their statements have been shown to the Court which have been enclosed with the bail application. Learned counsel for the applicant has shown the statement of Kamlesh Kumari, mother of the deceased, during course of cross examination, she has categorically stated that all accused persons were beating her son mercilessly through sharp edged weapons i.e. Kulhari, Fawda and Gadala however, co-accused Shobha (the present applicant), Sushma and Vandana were beating the deceased through brick (Eent/gumma). Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the weapons used in the commission of crime have been recovered on the pointing out of the co-accused Mohan,whose bail application has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 03.04.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 9477 of 2023. He has also stated that one co- accused Sushma has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 26.04.2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 9700 of 2022. The role of co-accused Sushma is at par with the present applicant. Sri Ramakar Shukla has stated that almost all fact witnesses have been examined and if the present applicant is released on bail she would not be able to influence any relevant/fact witness. He has further submitted that the dispute in question is an outcome of property dispute wherein the entire family of the present applicant has been implicated. Sri Shukla has drawn attention of this Court towards the dictums of Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Gokarakonda Naga Saibaba vs. State of Maharashtra, wherein, the Apex Court has observed that if all material witnesses have already been examined and cross examined, the bail application of the accused person may be considered. Besides the present applicant is a lady, therefore she may be given the benefit of Section 437 Cr.P.C (480 BNSS). The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever and if she is released on bail, she shall abide by all terms and condition of the bail order and shall cooperate in the trial properly.

4. Learned AGA and counsel for the informant have opposed the bail application vehemently and have submitted that all the accused persons have beaten the deceased mercilessly and on account of ante-mortem injuries, the deceased died.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that the present applicant is a lady and having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever; and the undertaking that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the present applicant may be enlarged on bail.

6. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

7. Let the applicant (Shobha Devi) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer to cooperate in the investigation and shall further remain present to cooperate in the investigation as and when the Investigating Team calls her to appear and if the charge-sheet is filed against her she shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly and shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when 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. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC/208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) The 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./351 of B.N.S.S., 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

10. Before parting with learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial by fixing short dates taking recourse of Section 309 Cr.P.C. without giving any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties.

11. It is made clear that since the present applicant has been granted bail considering the fact that she is a lady, therefore, the other co-accused may not seek pairity with the present applicant. Order Date :- 10.3.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.)