Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 210 (ALL)

Rekha v. State of U. P.

2016-01-14

RAGHVENDRA KUMAR

body2016
JUDGMENT Raghvendra Kumar, J. Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 2. This Bail Application has been filed on behalf of accused-applicant Smt. Rekha involved in Case Crime No.253 of 2014, under Sections 302, 201 IPC, P.S. Bisanda, District Banda. 3. It has been submitted on behalf of accused-applicant that the FIR of the case was lodged with the police on 9.9.2014 with respect to an incident which took place in between 4.8.2014 to 22.8.2014. The FIR has been lodged against unknown persons. After lapse of 10 months, the statement of Smt. Kunta Devi is alleged that she came to learn that her deceased brother Shivakant was beaten by Smt. Rekha and Sister Suman to death. The body was subsequently thrown in the canal. Subsequently, Smt. Saroj has also stated that both the sisters have badly beaten her brother. No incriminating material is alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the accused-applicant. The body was recovered on 22.8.2014. The DNA has also been recommended by the doctor who recommended the postmortem for authenticity the identity of the deceased. 4. It has further been submitted that co-accused Smt. Suman, Bala alias Bharat and Ram Prakash Patel have already been released on bail vide order dated 9.12.2015, 29.10.2015 and 13.10.2015 respectively passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 44011 of 2015, 37780 of 2015 and 36232 of 2015. 5. The learned AGA has opposed the bail application and but has not disputed that the co-accused have already been released on bail. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions of both sides, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it is a fit case for bail. 7. Let the accused-applicant Smt. Rekha be admitted to bail in the aforesaid case crime on her executing a personal bond and furnishing two heavy and reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to 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. 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 his counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (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. 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 of the Indian Penal Code. (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. 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.