Jareen Tamnna vs State Of U.P.
2024 Latest Caselaw 38079 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Jareen Tamnna vs State Of U.P. on 19 November, 2024

Author: Krishan Pahal

Bench: Krishan Pahal

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:180922
 
Court No. - 65
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6383 of 2024
 

 
Applicant :- Jareen Tamnna
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Singh,Sanjay Singh,Saroj Kumar Dubey
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
 

1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit and rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant, are taken on record.

2. Heard Sri Sanjay Singh, learned counsel for applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State.

3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.194 of 2023, under Sections 326, 304, 498A, 504 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Gyanpur, District Bhadohi with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 23.11.2023 and the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate in the trial.

5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.

6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, taking into consideration that there is a dying declaration in the instant case, whereby allegations have been made by deceased stating that it was the applicant and her husband Javed, who had poured kerosene oil over her and set her afire instead of extinguishing the fire; they are stated to have started making video of the act; the son of the deceased person had rushed and poured water over her for extinguishing the fire; the deceased has died due to said burn injuries, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant.

7. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected.

8. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment.

9. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

Order Date :- 19.11.2024

Sharad/-

(Krishan Pahal,J.)