High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:107263 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35160 of 2024 Applicant :- Naiema Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Pandey,Prateek Mishra,Sheshadri Trivedi,Siddhartha Baghel Counsel for Opposite Party :- Akash Tomar,G.A.,Sarvesh Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised.
Legal Reasoning
2. Heard Sri G.S. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sarvesh and Sri Akash Tomar, learned counsels for the informant as well as Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 143 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 304B, 34, 323 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Nauchandi, District Meerut, during the pendency of trial. PROSECUTION STORY : 4. As per prosecution story, two daughters of the informant were married to the two real brothers, who happen to be sons of the applicant as per Muslim rites on 14.05.2022. Heavy amount of pleasantries and gifts were exchanged at the time of said marriage running into crores of rupees. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected two victims to cruelty for demand of a Fortuner car as dowry and there are other allegations in the FIR regarding the deceased and her sister being taken to their maternal home and then returning back to their in-laws' house. 5. On 04.05.2024, the applicant and Muskan, sister-in-law of the deceased person are stated to have caught hold of the deceased person and her husband Sameer is stated to have fired at the deceased person causing her instantaneous death. Subsequent to it, brother-in-law of the deceased person is stated to have rushed to commit the murder of other sister, who somehow saved herself. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT : 6. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. She has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. It is a clear cut case of false implication. The feud, if any, occurred may be between husband- wife duo. 7. The role of catching hold of the deceased person has been assigned to the applicant and the co-accused Muskan. The daughter of the applicant Muskan, who has also been assigned the role of catching hold of the deceased person, has been exonerated by the police and the closure report has been filed qua her. It is further stated that the applicant, being mother-in-law is entitled for bail as she has deliberately been assigned the role of catching hold of the deceased person just to rope her in the instant case. 8. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant has also placed reliance on the post mortem report whereby one firearm injury of entry has been found measuring 1 cm x 1 cm present on 3 cm above left ear and no blackening or tattooing are present and there is wound of exit measuring 2.5 cm x 2 cm on right side of forehead. Learned Senor Counsel has stated that it means that fire has been shot from a distance of at least 10 ft., as such the averement, that the applicant had caught hold of the deceased person, pales into insignificance. It is not possible for a person to catch hold of a person that too when the fire is being made from such a distance, which may prove dangerous to her life as well, as such it is a clear cut case of false implication. 9. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 08.06.2024 and she is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF INFORMANT AND STATE : 10. Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the applicant and other co-accused persons are influential persons of the locality and they are not letting the trial proceed any further and they have deliberately stated that they do not have any advocate, as such an Amicus Curiae has been appointed in the said case. Till date, no charge has been framed against the applicant or co-accused persons. Learned counsel has also placed certified copies of the vakalatnama and the order sheet of the case. The case could be committed to court of sessions after much persuasion on 06.02.2025 only. 11. Learned counsel for the informant has further stated that as per provision of Section 250(1) of BNSS, limitation period of filing written arguments for discharge has already elapsed. It is next stated that the real sister of the deceased person has also sustained injuries in the said brawl, as such the applicant is not entitled for bail. Learned counsel for the informant has also placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Shabeen Ahmad Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2025 (4) SCC 172. CONCLUSION : 12. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the role of the applicant being that of catching hold coupled by the fact that co-accused Muskan, who has also been assigned the role of catching hold of deceased person, has been exonerated by the police, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 13. Let the applicant- Naiema, who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 14. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 15. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 8.7.2025 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad