High Court

1. Heard Sri Jitendra Rana, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State.

2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 355 of 2019 (S.T. No. 40 of 2020), under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Chauri Chaura, District Gorakhpur during pendency of the trial.

3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 03.10.2019 against applicant and according to the FIR applicant committed the murder of her parents.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, applicant is lady and on the basis of false allegation she has been made accused in the present matter.

5. He further submits, admittedly informant, who was her uncle, was not an eye witness. He further submits, even during investigation statement of any eye witness could not be recorded.

6. He further submits, it is a case of circumstantial evidence and on the ground that applicant used to reside in the house of her parents, she has been made accused accused in the present matter.

7. He further submits, actually on the date of incident in the morning applicant had gone to purchase the vegetable and when she returned back then found that her parents were lying dead and immediately thereafter she informed the informant and after arrival he lodged FIR against the applicant.

8. He further submits, it appears, with the aid of section 106 of Indian Evidence Act applicant has been made accused in the present matter but there is no evidence on record which can suggests that at the time of incident applicant was present inside her house where incident occurred.

9. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter she is in jail since 03.10.2019 i.e. for last almost five and half years and till date out of 12 witnesses of the charge-sheet only three witnesses could be examined, therefore, it appears, trial of the case is moving with languid pace and there is no hope of its early disposal.

10. He further submits, right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation even in serious cases he/she can be released on bail. He further submits, considering the long incarceration of about five and half years, it cannot be said that fundamental right of speedy trial of the applicant has not been violated. 11. He placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court passed in the case of Tapas Kumar Palit Vs. State of Chhattisgarh Criminal Appeal No. 738 of 2025 arising out of SLP (Criminal) No.15971 of 2024 decided on 14.02.2025.

12. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted, it is double murder case and applicant resided in the house of her parents, therefore, she was made accused in the present matter but could not dispute the fact that there is no evidence on record which can suggests that at the time of incident applicant was inside the house. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is a lady in the present matter she is in jail since 03.10.2019 i.e. for last almost five and half years and till date out of 12 witnesses of the charge-sheet only three witnesses could be examined. Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that applicant is not having any criminal history.

13. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

14. However, it is a case of double murder and as per allegation applicant committed the murder of her parents but it reflects, there is no eye witness account and applicant has been made accused in the present matter on the ground that she resided in the same house along with her parents i.e. deceased but it appears, there is no evidence on record which can suggests that at the time of incident applicant was present in her house.

15. Further, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 03.10.2019 i.e. for last almost five and half years and it appears, till date only three witnesses could be examined out of 12 witnesses of the charge-sheet, therefore, it appears, there is no hope of early disposal of the trial.

16. Further, law is settled that right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation even in serious cases he/she can be released on bail and considering the fact that in the present matter applicant is in jail since 03.10.2019 i.e. for last almost five and half years it cannot be said that her fundamental right of speedy trial has not been infringed. [See: Tapas Kumar Palit case (supra)]

17. Further, applicant is a lady and she is not having any criminal history.

18. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

19. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

20. Let the applicant - Suman Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case on 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 trial court on the dates fixed, unless her personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

21. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

22. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 3.3.2025 AK Pandey

1. Heard Sri Jitendra Rana, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State.

2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 355 of 2019 (S.T. No. 40 of 2020), under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Chauri Chaura, District Gorakhpur during pendency of the trial.

3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 03.10.2019 against applicant and according to the FIR applicant committed the murder of her parents.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, applicant is lady and on the basis of false allegation she has been made accused in the present matter.

5. He further submits, admittedly informant, who was her uncle, was not an eye witness. He further submits, even during investigation statement of any eye witness could not be recorded.

6. He further submits, it is a case of circumstantial evidence and on the ground that applicant used to reside in the house of her parents, she has been made accused accused in the present matter.

7. He further submits, actually on the date of incident in the morning applicant had gone to purchase the vegetable and when she returned back then found that her parents were lying dead and immediately thereafter she informed the informant and after arrival he lodged FIR against the applicant.

8. He further submits, it appears, with the aid of section 106 of Indian Evidence Act applicant has been made accused in the present matter but there is no evidence on record which can suggests that at the time of incident applicant was present inside her house where incident occurred.

9. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter she is in jail since 03.10.2019 i.e. for last almost five and half years and till date out of 12 witnesses of the charge-sheet only three witnesses could be examined, therefore, it appears, trial of the case is moving with languid pace and there is no hope of its early disposal.

10. He further submits, right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation even in serious cases he/she can be released on bail. He further submits, considering the long incarceration of about five and half years, it cannot be said that fundamental right of speedy trial of the applicant has not been violated. 11. He placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court passed in the case of Tapas Kumar Palit Vs. State of Chhattisgarh Criminal Appeal No. 738 of 2025 arising out of SLP (Criminal) No.15971 of 2024 decided on 14.02.2025.

12. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted, it is double murder case and applicant resided in the house of her parents, therefore, she was made accused in the present matter but could not dispute the fact that there is no evidence on record which can suggests that at the time of incident applicant was inside the house. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is a lady in the present matter she is in jail since 03.10.2019 i.e. for last almost five and half years and till date out of 12 witnesses of the charge-sheet only three witnesses could be examined. Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that applicant is not having any criminal history.

13. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

14. However, it is a case of double murder and as per allegation applicant committed the murder of her parents but it reflects, there is no eye witness account and applicant has been made accused in the present matter on the ground that she resided in the same house along with her parents i.e. deceased but it appears, there is no evidence on record which can suggests that at the time of incident applicant was present in her house.

15. Further, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 03.10.2019 i.e. for last almost five and half years and it appears, till date only three witnesses could be examined out of 12 witnesses of the charge-sheet, therefore, it appears, there is no hope of early disposal of the trial.

16. Further, law is settled that right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation even in serious cases he/she can be released on bail and considering the fact that in the present matter applicant is in jail since 03.10.2019 i.e. for last almost five and half years it cannot be said that her fundamental right of speedy trial has not been infringed. [See: Tapas Kumar Palit case (supra)]

17. Further, applicant is a lady and she is not having any criminal history.

18. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

19. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

20. Let the applicant - Suman Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case on 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 trial court on the dates fixed, unless her personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

21. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

22. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 3.3.2025 AK Pandey