Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:6516 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 956 of 2025 Applicant :- Reeta Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Chandra Bhooshan,Vaishali Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shani Pratap Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and Sri Chandra Bhooshan Tripathi, learned counsel, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant/ informant, the same is taken on record. 2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Reeta Devi) is languishing in jail since 10.10.2024 in Case Crime No.0255 of 2024, under Sections 110, 115 (2), 351 (2), 352 & 105 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station- Bazar Shukla, District-Amethi. 3.Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as she has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story so narrated in the First Information Report (in short F.I.R.). 4. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the general allegation of assault and beating has been levelled against four accused persons including the present applicant. The present applicant is not named in the F.I.R. though it has been attributed that there is one accused, who is wife of Ram Kripal. The present applicant is wife of Ram Kripal, therefore, she is also an accused in this case. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that for ancestral property two suits are pending between the parties. The present applicant has not attributed any specific role or weapon to assault the victim (since deceased). As per statement of one eye witness, her husband Ram Kripal was beating the victim (since deceased) through Bamboo Cane whereas the present applicant was beating the victim (since deceased) with fists and kicks. The cause of death is Coma due to antemortem head injury and the present applicant was admittedly not possessing any weapon. She has been implicated only for the reason that she is a wife of Ram Kripal. The charge-sheet has been filed in this case. She is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. He undertakes on behalf of the present applicant that she shall co-operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order. Besides, being a lady she may be given the benefit of Section 480 B.N.S.S. 6. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate as well as Sri Chandra Bhooshan Tripathi, learned counsel for the complainant/ informant have, however, opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the present applicant despite being a lady had actively participated in the act of crime, therefore, she is equally responsible like other accused persons, therefore, she is not entitled for grant of bail, but they could not dispute the aforesaid contentions of learned counsel for the applicant. 7.Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that the present applicant is not named in the F.I.R. and no specific role or weapon to assault the victim (since deceased) has been attributed to the present applicant; she has been implicated only for the reason that she is a wife of co-accused Ram Kripal; the cause of death is Coma due to antemortem head injury and the present applicant was admittedly not possessing any weapon; the charge-sheet has been filed; she is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever and the undertaking that she shall co-operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order; she being a lady she may be given the benefit of Section 480 B.N.S.S, without expressing any opinion on merits of the issue, I am of the view that the present applicant may be released on bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant (Reeta Devi) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) 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 court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC/208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) 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 Cr.P.C./351 of B.N.S.S., 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court 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 against her in accordance with law. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 30.1.2025 Suresh/ Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench