Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 65 (ALL)

Zahida v. State of U. P.

2020-01-07

AJIT SINGH

body2020
JUDGMENT : 1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicant in the Court today is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. 3. By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 121 of 2019, under Sections 302 and 120B I.P.C., P.S. Thanabhawan, district-Shamli, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial. 4. The first information report was lodged against Chand, alleging therein that on 20.3.2019 at about 5:00 p.m. brother of the complainant along with Karim Beg and Naushad, residents of same locality had gone to the shop of Maaz to purchase ready made garments, the present accused armed with firearm reached there and had shot fired on his head, as a result of which the deceased has died on the spot. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was not named in the first information report. Her implication in the present case is based upon the extrajudicial confession allegedly made by Sohail and Ajmal, friends of the deceased before the police, in which they have assigned the role of hatching conspiracy to the applicant in the murder of deceased, whereas the role of committing the murder of the deceased has been attributed to co-accused Chand, son of the present accused. He next submitted that that apart from the extrajudicial confession of friends of the deceased, which is wholly inadmissible in evidence against the applicant, there is no tangible evidence on record against the applicant. He lastly submitted that the applicant, who is in jail since 10.10.2019 and has no criminal antecedents to her credit is entitled to be enlarged on bail during pendency of the trial. 6. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. 7. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of the punishment, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial. 8. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of the punishment, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial. 8. Let the applicant, Smt. Zahida be released on bail in the aforesaid case on her executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:- (a) The applicant shall attend the court according to the conditions of the bond executed by him. (b) 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. 9. It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.