Allahabad High Court
Krishnawati vs State Of U.P. on 23 August, 2025
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:146214
Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21579 of 2025
Applicant :- Krishnawati
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Devendra Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Satish Sahu
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Devendra Singh, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Satish Sahu, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.294 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 351(3) and 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station- Khaga, District- Fatehpur with the prayer to enlarge her on bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant alongwith other family members is stated to have entered into an altercation with the deceased over the distribution of money of proceeds of sale of certain buffaloes, whereby the applicant is stated to have snatched the said money from her daughter-in-law and had even retained her ornaments.
5. In the broad day light, the applicant is stated to have committed the murder of daughter and son-in-law of the informant on 17.10.2024 between 02:00-03:00 p.m.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the FIR is delayed by about five hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The allegations are per se false. The applicant is a lady and she has nothing to do with the said offence. Learned counsel has stated that the statements of several villagers, namely, Ashok Tiwari, Shyam Lal, Durjee and others indicate that there are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that there is no recovery from the applicant whatsoever, as such, the case of applicant is at different footing to other accused persons from whom the weapons of offence have been recovered. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 20.10.2024 and she is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail.
8. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the FIR is prompt and it is a broad day light murder. The applicant in collusion with other accused persons had committed the gruesome murder of her son and daughter-in-law. She is the main accused person as she had retained the proceeds of sale of buffaloes and had also retained the ornaments of her daughter-in-law, who happens to be daughter of the informant.
9. Learned counsel for the informant has further argued that the gravity of offence is but evident from the injuries sustained by the deceased persons. The daughter-in-law of the applicant had sustained 17 injuries and the son of applicant had sustained 11 injuries in all. The cause of death of both the deceased persons is shock and hemorrhage as a result of antemortem injuries.
10. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the modus operandi of the applicant coupled by the fact that she is named in the FIR and also that she carried motive of the offence, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant.
11. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected.
12. 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.
13. 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 :- 23.8.2025
Vikas/-
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
