MAYA DEVI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO.
BAIL/2252/2025 · 2025-07-31
Karunesh Singh Pawar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 128678 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 128678 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44443 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2252 of 2025 Applicant :- Maya Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Lalji Prasad Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ramkripal Yadav Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State, Shri Ramkripal Yadav, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 5.11.2023 at about 10.00 am, the accused Vikram took away the minor son of the informant.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR. Her name has surfaced in the confessional statement of the co-accused Jagdish Rawat, which has been recorded by the investigating officer after a gap of 2 months and 10 days from the FIR. It is next submitted that the co-accused Vikram @ Virendra against whom the allegation of kidnapping the victim has been made, has already been granted bail by a coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 25.4.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8436 of 2024. Hence, the present applicant claims parity and submits that her case is on better footing than that of the co-accused Vikram @ Virendra. It is further submitted that the applicant is a lady having no criminal history and she is languishing in jail since 16.4.2024. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant. On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record so also the fact that the applicant is not named in the FIR; her name has surfaced after a lapse of 2 months and 10 days from the FIR; she has no criminal history; she is languishing in jail since 16.4.2024; the co-accused Vikram @
Virendra has already been granted bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail on the ground of parity. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant- Maya Devi involved in Case Crime No. 462 of 2023, under Sections 364 IPC, Police Station- Momoodabad, District- Sitapur, 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the
facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such
facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) 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. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him in accordance with law. (vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 B.N.S.S. 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 him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of B.N.S.
Order Date :- 31.7.2025 Shravan Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench