High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:156509 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34259 of 2023 Applicant :- Sapana Pandey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Babu Lal Ram Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised.
Legal Reasoning
2. Heard Sri Babu Lal Ram, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Sapana Pandey, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 340 of 2022, under Sections 324, 302, 34, 120-B IPC, registered at P.S. Sachendi, District Kanpur Nagar. 4. The FIR of the present matter was lodged on 01.12.2022 by the applicant against Ram Krishna Vishwakarma and one unknown person alleging therein that her husband Rishabh Tripathi was going with Manish Singh her neighbour in a barat from his scooty on 27.11.2022. The tyre of the scooty was punctured and then both the said persons were dragging it for repairing and as soon as they reached Chakarpur Road near Shiva Hotel some one from behind assaulted her husband with sharp weapon due to which he received injuries. Manish Singh called police from his mobile and then her husband was taken to Hallet hospital where the doctors gave first aid and controlled the bleeding. Later on, his condition deteriorated and was taken to private hospital whereas he was admitted. It is further stated that the incident has been committed in a pre-planned manner as her father-in-law had given Rs. 3 lakhs to Ram Krishna Vishwakarma and his sons after his retirement. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that subsequently in the statement of Manish Singh the alleged eye witness and the person accompanying the deceased the version which has come is that the applicant was having illicit relationship with Surendra Nath Yadav and Raj Kapoor which was subsequently known to the persons of the mohallah and due to the said reason, the applicant conspired for the said incident. It is argued that the said story is without any credible evidence. It is argued that the applicant is a lady and she is entitled to the benefit of Section 437 Cr.P.C. It is argued that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 21 of the affidavit and is in jail since 10.12.2022. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is the wife of the deceased Rishabh Tripathi. She in a calculated manner lodged First Information Report so that the matter may be given a different colour. It is argued that with regards to the illicit affair of the applicant there is an evidence of even other witnesses. It is argued that the First Information Report has been lodged only because of the reason that the applicant may not be suspected as being involved in the present matter. It is argued that by giving a false version in the FIR, the involvement of the applicant is very clear in the matter. 7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is the first informant. Subsequently she has made an accused in the present case on the basis of the statement of the eye witness Manish Singh. The motive against the applicant is stated by the witnesses that she was having some illicit relationship with some one and as such she conspired the plan of murder. 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 and also considering the applicant is a lady, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 9. Let the applicant Sapana Pandey, 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 82 Cr.P.C., 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 174-A I.P.C. (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 313 Cr.P.C. 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 229-A IPC. (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. Order Date :- 4.8.2023 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad