Smt. Meera Devi vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 19280 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 65
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4994 of 2022
 

 
Appellant :- Smt. Meera Devi
 
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Nirbhay Singh,Satya Prakash Tiwari
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sanjay Kumar Shukla
 

 
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

Heard Shri Satya Prakash Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Sanjay Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 and Shri Om Prakash Dwivedi, learned A.G.A. for the State.

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant Smt. Meera Devi to set aside the impugned order dated 13.06.2022 whereby the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Kannauj, has rejected the bail application No. 658 of 2022 of the appellant moved by her in Case Crime No. 0345 of 2021, under Section 120-B I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v), of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Saurikh District- Kannauj.

Brief facts of the case are that the first information report dated 26.09.2021 was lodged by wife of the deceased against the appellant and two other named persons Rajeev and Pappu Yadav stating that on 26.09.2021 at about 06:30 P.M. her husband was going to his shop, from his house, when he reached near C.S.B. road near Tillam Hotel co-accused Rajeev rammed into the pickup intentionally, by which her husband died on spot. The alleged pickup driven by appellant's son co-accused Rajeev. The appellant and other co-accused Pappu Yadav after hatching conspiracy murdered her husband by hitting him from behind.

After lodging the first information report, inquest of the body of the deceased was conducted on 26.09.2021 at 15:00 hours. As per inquest report bleeding was found on ear, right elbow, right knee, left elbow finger and left leg. Postmortem of the deceased was conducted on 26.09.2021 at 04:45 P.M. As per postmortem report, 10 injuries were found on the person of the deceased which are lacerated wound on right side of parietal region and right side of elbow joint; and multiple abrasion injuries were found on the various part of the deceased as face, forehead, right arm, left side of knee joint, right knee joint, left side of ankle joint region, foot and abraded contusion on left arm. After recording the statements of the other prosecution witnesses, charge sheet had been submitted against the appellant and other two named and one Vijendra on 25.05.2022. The appellant was arrested on 18.05.2022.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the appellant is real mother of the co-accused Rajeev. It is further submitted that the main role of dash by pickup assigned to co-accused Rajeev. There is no evidence with regard to hatching of conspiracy to commit murder of deceased Khushi Ram. It is further submitted that appellant is 55 years old lady. It is further submitted that appellant's side was lodged an F.I.R. on 04.06.2021 being Case No. 210 of 2021 under Sections 147, 148, 452, 323, 506 of I.P.C. against the informant's side prior to lodging of the impugned F.I.R., during the course of investigation section 308 of I.P.C. was added. The impugned F.I.R. was lodged as counter blast case of Case Crime No. 210 of 2021. It is next submitted that the eye witnesses of the alleged incident have not disclosed the name of the co-accused Rajiv and also the number of the pickup vehicle.

It is further submitted that the appellant is languishing in jail since 18.05.2022. The appellant has no criminal history.

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the appellant is enlarged on bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 have supported the order passed by the Special Judge and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant. But he could not point out any material to the contrary. He further submits that in case the applicant is released on bail, she will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

After considering the facts of the present case it prima facie appears that;

(a) The appellant is 55 years old lady.

(b) The main role of dashed by pickup has been assigned to co-accused Rajeev.

(c) The role of hatching conspiracy has been assigned to the present appellant.

(d) The appellant is languishing in jail since 18.05.2022.

It is a settled law that while granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusation, the nature of the evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, his role and involvement in the offence, his involvement in other cases and reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with.

Taking into account the totality of facts and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308, Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors., v. Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429, Ram Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh & Ors., (2002) 3 SCC 598, Prasanta Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee & Anr., (2010) 14 SCC 496 and Mahipal v. Rajesh Kumar & Anr., (2020) 2 SCC 118, the larger interest of the public/State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail. Hence, the present criminal appeal is allowed and impugned order dated 13.06.2022 is set aside.

Let appellant/applicant, Smt. Meera Devi be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:

(i) 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 her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) 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 of Cr.P.C.

(iv) 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 the trial court.

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel.

(vi) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. If in the opinion of the trial court that 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 in accordance with law.

The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law after the release of the applicant, if there is no other legal impediment.

It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant along-with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked ;

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

Order Date :- 1.12.2022

Ishan