High Court · 2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri V.M. Sahai, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Gulam Mustafa, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.188 of 2020 under Sections 302, 120B, 34 of IPC and Section 7 of CLAA, Police Station- Gangaghat, District- Unnao, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is a lady and she has been falsely implicated in the present case and she is in jail since 29.06.2020. He has further submitted that the applicant is associated with politics and she had contested the election for the post of Chairman of Nagar Palika Parishad, Unnao, 2019, and thereafter, on the behest of some rivals, she was implicated in 10 cases. Thereafter, the alleged incident was taken place, for which, FIR of case in question was lodged and the name of applicant was also mentioned in the FIR assigning her the role of firing. He has further submitted that during the course of investigation, Mukhtaar, eye witness of the alleged incident, was examined as PW-2 who did not support the prosecution version. It was also found that Mohd. Rizwan @ Rizwan Kana and Sufiyan were the main shooters and their vehicles were driven by one Mohd. Sanu @ Gandhi and Teepu Sultan @ Rashid. He has further submitted that after investigation, charge sheet was prepared against the accused persons, namely, Santosh Bajpai, Abdul Bari, Vikas Dixit, Swaroop Chandra Sharma @ Ranu Sharma, Kapil Khatariya @ Kapil Dev Shashtri, Shahnawas Bihari @ Shahnawas Anjar, Aksar Ahmad, Mohd. Sanu @ Gandhi, Teepu Sultan @ Rashid, Monu Khan @ Monu Lutera, Mohd. Rizwan @ Rizwan Kana, Sufiyan, Kanahiya Awasthi (husband of the applicant- died on 06.12.2024), Divya Awasthi (applicant), Raghvendra Awasthi @ Yashu (brother-in-law/dever of the applicant), Kaushal Kishor @ Apradhi Baba. No evidence was found against Atul Dubey, as a result, his name was dropped in the final report. He has further submitted that trial of case in question was started, and during the pendency of trial, co- accused persons, namely, Santosh Bajpai, Abdul Bari, Vikas Dixit, Swaroop Chandra Sharma @ Ranu Sharma Kapil Khatariya @ Kapil Dev Shashtri, Shahnawas Bihari @ Shahnawas Anjar, Aksar Ahmad, Mohd. Sanu @ Gandhi, Teep Sultan @ Rashid, Monu Khan @ Monu Lutera and Mohd. Rizwan @ Rizwan Kana and Sufiyan have already been enlarged on bail. He has further submitted that there is no possibility of tampering of any evidence as all the prosecution evidences have already been concluded, statement under section 313 CrPC has also been recorded on 10.01.2024 as well as a list of three defence witnesses has been given by the applicant. He has further submitted that husband of appellant died on 06.12.2024, thereafter, short-term bail was granted to the applicant for two weeks and she did not misuse the liberty of bail and appeared before the Court concerned on the date fix and currently, she is confined. In these circumstances, the applicant is also entitled for regular bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail.

4. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the prayer of the applicant for grant of bail and submitted that during the course of investigation, active involvement of the applicant was found in the alleged conspiracy. They have further submitted that at the time of contesting the bail application of the co-accused Raghvendra Awasthi @ Yashu, in Bail Aapplication No.863 of 2022, it was found that sufficient evidence was found against the applicant for conspiracy. They have further submitted that as the statement under Section 313 CrPC has already been concluded and trial is going to be concluded very soon, therefore, applicant is not entitled for bail but they do not dispute this fact that applicant is a lady, she is in jail since 29.06.2020 and when she was granted interim bail on the death of her husband, she did not make any misuse of the aforesaid liberty and appeared before the Court concerned on the date fixed.

5. Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record, contents of the F.I.R., other relevant documents as well as totality of fact and circumstances, it is undisputed fact that the applicant is a lady and she is in jail since 29.06.2020. It is also evident that the applicant was granted interim bail on the death of her husband but she did not make any misuse of the aforesaid liberty and appeared before the Court concerned on the date fixed. It is also apparent that the prosecution evident has already been concluded and there is no possibility of tampering of evidences. Thus, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

6. Let applicant - Divya Awasthi - be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC. (v) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his 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 him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC. (vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed.

7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

8. Trial court is directed to conclude trial, expeditiously without giving any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. Order Date :- 18.2.2025/V. Sinha VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri V.M. Sahai, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Gulam Mustafa, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.188 of 2020 under Sections 302, 120B, 34 of IPC and Section 7 of CLAA, Police Station- Gangaghat, District- Unnao, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is a lady and she has been falsely implicated in the present case and she is in jail since 29.06.2020. He has further submitted that the applicant is associated with politics and she had contested the election for the post of Chairman of Nagar Palika Parishad, Unnao, 2019, and thereafter, on the behest of some rivals, she was implicated in 10 cases. Thereafter, the alleged incident was taken place, for which, FIR of case in question was lodged and the name of applicant was also mentioned in the FIR assigning her the role of firing. He has further submitted that during the course of investigation, Mukhtaar, eye witness of the alleged incident, was examined as PW-2 who did not support the prosecution version. It was also found that Mohd. Rizwan @ Rizwan Kana and Sufiyan were the main shooters and their vehicles were driven by one Mohd. Sanu @ Gandhi and Teepu Sultan @ Rashid. He has further submitted that after investigation, charge sheet was prepared against the accused persons, namely, Santosh Bajpai, Abdul Bari, Vikas Dixit, Swaroop Chandra Sharma @ Ranu Sharma, Kapil Khatariya @ Kapil Dev Shashtri, Shahnawas Bihari @ Shahnawas Anjar, Aksar Ahmad, Mohd. Sanu @ Gandhi, Teepu Sultan @ Rashid, Monu Khan @ Monu Lutera, Mohd. Rizwan @ Rizwan Kana, Sufiyan, Kanahiya Awasthi (husband of the applicant- died on 06.12.2024), Divya Awasthi (applicant), Raghvendra Awasthi @ Yashu (brother-in-law/dever of the applicant), Kaushal Kishor @ Apradhi Baba. No evidence was found against Atul Dubey, as a result, his name was dropped in the final report. He has further submitted that trial of case in question was started, and during the pendency of trial, co- accused persons, namely, Santosh Bajpai, Abdul Bari, Vikas Dixit, Swaroop Chandra Sharma @ Ranu Sharma Kapil Khatariya @ Kapil Dev Shashtri, Shahnawas Bihari @ Shahnawas Anjar, Aksar Ahmad, Mohd. Sanu @ Gandhi, Teep Sultan @ Rashid, Monu Khan @ Monu Lutera and Mohd. Rizwan @ Rizwan Kana and Sufiyan have already been enlarged on bail. He has further submitted that there is no possibility of tampering of any evidence as all the prosecution evidences have already been concluded, statement under section 313 CrPC has also been recorded on 10.01.2024 as well as a list of three defence witnesses has been given by the applicant. He has further submitted that husband of appellant died on 06.12.2024, thereafter, short-term bail was granted to the applicant for two weeks and she did not misuse the liberty of bail and appeared before the Court concerned on the date fix and currently, she is confined. In these circumstances, the applicant is also entitled for regular bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail.

4. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the prayer of the applicant for grant of bail and submitted that during the course of investigation, active involvement of the applicant was found in the alleged conspiracy. They have further submitted that at the time of contesting the bail application of the co-accused Raghvendra Awasthi @ Yashu, in Bail Aapplication No.863 of 2022, it was found that sufficient evidence was found against the applicant for conspiracy. They have further submitted that as the statement under Section 313 CrPC has already been concluded and trial is going to be concluded very soon, therefore, applicant is not entitled for bail but they do not dispute this fact that applicant is a lady, she is in jail since 29.06.2020 and when she was granted interim bail on the death of her husband, she did not make any misuse of the aforesaid liberty and appeared before the Court concerned on the date fixed.

5. Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record, contents of the F.I.R., other relevant documents as well as totality of fact and circumstances, it is undisputed fact that the applicant is a lady and she is in jail since 29.06.2020. It is also evident that the applicant was granted interim bail on the death of her husband but she did not make any misuse of the aforesaid liberty and appeared before the Court concerned on the date fixed. It is also apparent that the prosecution evident has already been concluded and there is no possibility of tampering of evidences. Thus, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

6. Let applicant - Divya Awasthi - be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC. (v) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his 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 him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC. (vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed.

7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

8. Trial court is directed to conclude trial, expeditiously without giving any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. Order Date :- 18.2.2025/V. Sinha VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench