High Court · 2025
Case Details
Heard Sri Ramakar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Arun Verma, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Shivani) is languishing in jail since 07.10.2024 in Case Crime No.403 of 2024, under Sections 103 (1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station-Kotwali Dehat, District-Sultanpur. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as she has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story so narrated in the First Information Report (in short F.I.R.). Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the allegation of assault and beating has been attributed to all the accused persons including the present applicant, who is a lady. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that as per the allegation, all the accused persons have assaulted on the deceased through Axe and Bamboo Cane. The deceased received two incised wound right side of neck and one incised wound over the right side of the neck just below previous incised wound. Further attention has been drawn towards Annexure No.7 of the application, which is a statement of eye witnesses Smt. Jagrani Verma and Sri Ram Bahadur Verma who have stated that all the named accused persons as well as one more co-accused, namely, Dilip Tiwari S/o Sri Tribhuvan Tiwari were assaulting the deceased through Axe. The aforesaid co-accused, Dilip Tiwari, has been granted bail by the learned Court of Sessions only for the reason that he was not named in the F.I.R. and the learned trial court has not considered the statement of eye witnesses. Sri Ramakar Shukla has drawn attention of this Court towards Annexure No.9 of the application which is statement of one villagers, namely, Dharam Raj Verma and the maternal-grand- father of the deceased, namely, Sri Ram Naipal who have stated that the deceased had seen the co-accused, Dilip Tiwari with the daughter of Sri Nand Lal (Shivani), who is also co-accused, in an objectionable condition, therefore, all the co-accused including Dilip Tiwari planned to eliminate the deceased Anuj Verma. Sri Shukla has also shown the confessional statement of co-accused, Shani Verma, who is the brother of Shivani has confessed this guilt and has submitted that Anuj Verma (since deceased) was having relations with his sister (Shivani) and when the co-accused, Shani Verma objected the deceased, Anuj Verma, he taunted upon him and used to abuse him, therefore, in a fit of rage he followed the deceased and attacked upon him through Axe twice. Both the aforesaid two assaults were on neck area and head area. After committing such act he had hidden the Axe in the Paddy field. The aforesaid Axe was recovered on the pointing out of the co-accused, Shani Verma. The aforesaid statement is the part of case diary though it could not be filed with this application. This fact has not been disputed by the other side. Sri Ramakar Shukla has stated that the present applicant, who is daughter of the co-accused Nand Lal, has been implicated falsely being a family member of the co-accused Nand Lal. She is having criminal history of one case bearing Case Crime No.465 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506 & 34 I.P.C., Police Station-Kotwali Dehat, District-Sultanpur, wherein she has been granted bail by the learned court below on 20.09.2023 (Annexure No.11), as recital to this effect has been given in para-27 of the bail application. She being a lady may be given benefit of Section 480 B.N.S.S.. The charge-sheet has been filed in this case and she undertakes that she shall co-operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court, and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate has, however, opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that since the role of the present applicant was found in the commission of crime, therefore, she is not entitled for grant of bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid contention of learned counsel for the applicant. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the confessional statement of co-accused, Shani Verma, who is the brother of Shivani has confessed his guilt that Anuj Verma (since deceased) was having relations with his sister (Shivani) and when he objected the deceased, Anuj Verma, he taunted upon him and used to abuse him, therefore, in a fit of rage he followed the deceased and attacked upon him through Axe twice; the charge-sheet has been filed and the undertaking that she shall co-operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order; the present applicant being a lady may be given the benefit of Section 480 B.N.S.S, without expressing any opinion on merits of the issue, I am of the view that the present applicant may be released on bail in this case. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed. Let the applicant (Shivani) 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 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. Order Date :- 5.2.2025 Anurag ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Heard Sri Ramakar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Arun Verma, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Shivani) is languishing in jail since 07.10.2024 in Case Crime No.403 of 2024, under Sections 103 (1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station-Kotwali Dehat, District-Sultanpur. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as she has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story so narrated in the First Information Report (in short F.I.R.). Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the allegation of assault and beating has been attributed to all the accused persons including the present applicant, who is a lady. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that as per the allegation, all the accused persons have assaulted on the deceased through Axe and Bamboo Cane. The deceased received two incised wound right side of neck and one incised wound over the right side of the neck just below previous incised wound. Further attention has been drawn towards Annexure No.7 of the application, which is a statement of eye witnesses Smt. Jagrani Verma and Sri Ram Bahadur Verma who have stated that all the named accused persons as well as one more co-accused, namely, Dilip Tiwari S/o Sri Tribhuvan Tiwari were assaulting the deceased through Axe. The aforesaid co-accused, Dilip Tiwari, has been granted bail by the learned Court of Sessions only for the reason that he was not named in the F.I.R. and the learned trial court has not considered the statement of eye witnesses. Sri Ramakar Shukla has drawn attention of this Court towards Annexure No.9 of the application which is statement of one villagers, namely, Dharam Raj Verma and the maternal-grand- father of the deceased, namely, Sri Ram Naipal who have stated that the deceased had seen the co-accused, Dilip Tiwari with the daughter of Sri Nand Lal (Shivani), who is also co-accused, in an objectionable condition, therefore, all the co-accused including Dilip Tiwari planned to eliminate the deceased Anuj Verma. Sri Shukla has also shown the confessional statement of co-accused, Shani Verma, who is the brother of Shivani has confessed this guilt and has submitted that Anuj Verma (since deceased) was having relations with his sister (Shivani) and when the co-accused, Shani Verma objected the deceased, Anuj Verma, he taunted upon him and used to abuse him, therefore, in a fit of rage he followed the deceased and attacked upon him through Axe twice. Both the aforesaid two assaults were on neck area and head area. After committing such act he had hidden the Axe in the Paddy field. The aforesaid Axe was recovered on the pointing out of the co-accused, Shani Verma. The aforesaid statement is the part of case diary though it could not be filed with this application. This fact has not been disputed by the other side. Sri Ramakar Shukla has stated that the present applicant, who is daughter of the co-accused Nand Lal, has been implicated falsely being a family member of the co-accused Nand Lal. She is having criminal history of one case bearing Case Crime No.465 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506 & 34 I.P.C., Police Station-Kotwali Dehat, District-Sultanpur, wherein she has been granted bail by the learned court below on 20.09.2023 (Annexure No.11), as recital to this effect has been given in para-27 of the bail application. She being a lady may be given benefit of Section 480 B.N.S.S.. The charge-sheet has been filed in this case and she undertakes that she shall co-operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court, and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate has, however, opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that since the role of the present applicant was found in the commission of crime, therefore, she is not entitled for grant of bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid contention of learned counsel for the applicant. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the confessional statement of co-accused, Shani Verma, who is the brother of Shivani has confessed his guilt that Anuj Verma (since deceased) was having relations with his sister (Shivani) and when he objected the deceased, Anuj Verma, he taunted upon him and used to abuse him, therefore, in a fit of rage he followed the deceased and attacked upon him through Axe twice; the charge-sheet has been filed and the undertaking that she shall co-operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order; the present applicant being a lady may be given the benefit of Section 480 B.N.S.S, without expressing any opinion on merits of the issue, I am of the view that the present applicant may be released on bail in this case. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed. Let the applicant (Shivani) 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 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. Order Date :- 5.2.2025 Anurag ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench