High Court · 2025

Applicant :- Kiran Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Leena Srivastava,Mahendra Pal Singh Gaur Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Mahendra Pal Singh Gaur, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ajay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the material on record.

3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Kiran, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 494 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 140(1), 238 B.N.S., Police Station Sahaswan, District Budaun.

4. The first information report of the present case was lodged on 06.11.2024 by Ashraf against unknown person alleging therein that his brother Mushahid received a phone on his mobile on 27.10.2024 at about 11 am and then went away on his motorcycle without informing anyone and did not return back. A missing report was got lodged on 28.10.2024 about the same. The missing report be converted into a report and appropriate action be taken.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is not named in the first information report. It is submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that there is no credible evidence against the applicant. Learned counsel has submitted that during investigation the police recorded the statement of Puttan and Nasiruddin under Section 180 B.N.S.S. to show that the deceased was last seen in the company of the applicant but the said two persons have not been made as a witness in the charge-sheet which has been submitted subsequent to conclusion of investigation. It is submitted that there is no recovery of any incriminating material either from the possession or pointing out of the applicant. It is submitted that the implication of the applicant in the present case is only on account of suspicion. The applicant is a lady and is entitled to the benefit of Section 480 B.NS.S. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 21 and is in jail since 07.11.2024.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that on 06.11.2024 itself the informant gave an application to the police disclosing the name of the applicant in it and further the fact that the deceased was having an illicit relationship with the applicant of which the deceased was having photographs in his mobile and was murdered by the applicant and her husband. It is submitted that the dead body of the deceased was recovered on 06.11.2024 after which it was subjected to postmortem examination wherein it was found to be in a decomposed condition and the cause of death could not be ascertained in which time of death was opined to be about 11 to 12 days. It is submitted that as such the applicant is involved in the matter.

7. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the present case is a case of circumstantial evidence. There is no eye- witness to the murder. The applicant is not named in the first information report. The applicant is a lady. There is no recovery of any incriminating material. The two witnesses of last seen interrogated by the police are not witnesses in the charge- sheet.

8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

9. Let the applicant- Kiran, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under section 84 B.N.S.S., 2023 may be issued and if 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 209 B.N.S., 2023. (v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 351 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 and the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 B.N.S., 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

10. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

11. The bail application is allowed.

12. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Applicant :- Kiran Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Leena Srivastava,Mahendra Pal Singh Gaur Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Mahendra Pal Singh Gaur, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ajay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the material on record.

3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Kiran, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 494 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 140(1), 238 B.N.S., Police Station Sahaswan, District Budaun.

4. The first information report of the present case was lodged on 06.11.2024 by Ashraf against unknown person alleging therein that his brother Mushahid received a phone on his mobile on 27.10.2024 at about 11 am and then went away on his motorcycle without informing anyone and did not return back. A missing report was got lodged on 28.10.2024 about the same. The missing report be converted into a report and appropriate action be taken.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is not named in the first information report. It is submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that there is no credible evidence against the applicant. Learned counsel has submitted that during investigation the police recorded the statement of Puttan and Nasiruddin under Section 180 B.N.S.S. to show that the deceased was last seen in the company of the applicant but the said two persons have not been made as a witness in the charge-sheet which has been submitted subsequent to conclusion of investigation. It is submitted that there is no recovery of any incriminating material either from the possession or pointing out of the applicant. It is submitted that the implication of the applicant in the present case is only on account of suspicion. The applicant is a lady and is entitled to the benefit of Section 480 B.NS.S. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 21 and is in jail since 07.11.2024.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that on 06.11.2024 itself the informant gave an application to the police disclosing the name of the applicant in it and further the fact that the deceased was having an illicit relationship with the applicant of which the deceased was having photographs in his mobile and was murdered by the applicant and her husband. It is submitted that the dead body of the deceased was recovered on 06.11.2024 after which it was subjected to postmortem examination wherein it was found to be in a decomposed condition and the cause of death could not be ascertained in which time of death was opined to be about 11 to 12 days. It is submitted that as such the applicant is involved in the matter.

7. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the present case is a case of circumstantial evidence. There is no eye- witness to the murder. The applicant is not named in the first information report. The applicant is a lady. There is no recovery of any incriminating material. The two witnesses of last seen interrogated by the police are not witnesses in the charge- sheet.

8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

9. Let the applicant- Kiran, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under section 84 B.N.S.S., 2023 may be issued and if 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 209 B.N.S., 2023. (v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 351 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 and the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 B.N.S., 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

10. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

11. The bail application is allowed.

12. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad