Smt. Lovely Jaiswal vs State Of U.P. And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 15052 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Smt. Lovely Jaiswal vs State Of U.P. And Another on 1 May, 2024

Author: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

Bench: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:78275
 
Court No. - 65
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 44 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Smt. Lovely Jaiswal
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Kumar Pandey
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jitendra Singh,Saurabh Tripathi
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
 

1. Sri Anurag Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for applicant is not present.

2. This bail cancellation application was filed to cancel bail granted to accused by order dated 26.07.2022 passed by this Court in Case Crime No. 303 of 2022 under Sections 328, 376, 384, 504 IPC, Police Station- Roza, District- Shahjahanpur.

3. Sri Jitendra Singh, learned counsel for accused is present and he refers paragraph nos. 8, 9 and 10 of this application which are quoted below -:

?8. That it is relevant to mentioned here that, after release on bail the opposite party no.2 Amit Kanaujiya threatening to the applicant and her family members to implicate in false case.

9. That the accused Amit Kumar was making pressure upon the applicant for compromise and change the statement, but when the applicant denied to them, then accused Amit moved a false application u/s 156(3) cr.p.c. against the brother of the applicant namely Om Prakash Jaiswal @ Lalu. A true copy of the application u/s 156(3) cr.p.c. filed by the accused Amit Kumar is being filed here with and marked as Annexure no.3 to this affidavit.

10. That the accused Amit regularly given threatening to the applicant to implicate her family members in false and cases.?

4. He further submits that aforesaid averments could not be a ground to cancel bail of accused, however, he refers that trial is proceeding and 3 prosecution witnesses have been examined; there is no material on record to show that accused has violated any condition of bail.

5. In aforesaid circumstances and taking note of above submissions, it appears that aforesaid contents could not be a ground to cancel the bail, therefore, in the light of judgment passed by Supreme Court in Himanshu Sharma vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 187, I do not find it a fit case to cancel bail of accused at this stage.

6. Accordingly, bail cancellation application is rejected and trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously.

7. Trial Court will be at liberty to cancel bail of accused in case it is found that he has violated any condition of bail.

8. Registrar (Compliance) to take steps.

Order Date :- 1.5.2024

N. Sinha