Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:13202 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1295 of 2025 Applicant :- Saroj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Nath Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dadu Ram Shukla (D.R. Shukla ) Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant,Sri D.R.Shukla, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release her on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 23 of 2022, under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 386,506 of the I.P.C. and section 7-A of the P.C. Act, Police Station-S.I.T.,District-Lucknow. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He added that the applicant is neither vendor, vendee or the marginal witness of the alleged sale deed and the other co-accused persons who were infact involved in committing offence, have already been enlarged on bail. He next added that the police has failed to collect any cogent piece of evidence against the applicant and she has cooperated in the investigation proceedings and the chargesheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper the evidences or she would threaten the witnesses. He submits that the applicant has five cases criminal history,which has been explained in paragraph no. 20 of the bail application. He also submits that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and she is languishing in jail since 05-01-2024 and she undertakes that in case, she is granted bail, she will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, Sri D.R.Shukla, learned counsel appearing for the complainant has vehemently opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant in the name of 'Saroj Devi' is involved in committing the offence as is evident from the registered sale deed. He added that the applicant has five cases criminal history and as such, she is not entitled for any relief. Learned AGA appearing for the State has also supported the version of learned counsel for the complainant and submitted that the the applicant is not entitled for any relief. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is a woman and she has cooperated in the investigation proceedings and the chargesheet has been filed and as such, there seems to be no possibility that the applicant would tamper the evidences or she would threaten the witnesses. Further the applicant is neither vendor nor vendee or the marginal witness of the sale deed in question and she has explained five cases criminal history and she is languishing in jail since 05-01-2024 and she has undertaken that if she is granted bail, she will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant-Saroj involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, 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:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) 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. She 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 of the Indian Penal Code; (3) 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.; and (4) 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. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 4.3.2025 AKS Digitally signed by :- ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench