Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:129126 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16371 of 2023 Applicant :- Smt. Savitri Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Srivastava,Pankaj Sharma,Rakesh Kumar Verma,Satish Kumar,Sunil Kumar Gaur Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Satish Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant-Smt. Savitri Devi, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.26 of 2021, under Section 302 IPC, P.S. Pinahat, District Agra. 4. This is the second bail application. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected vide order dated 4.5.2022 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.41541 of 2021. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the trial in the present matter has started in which six witnesses have been examined namely Smt. Rinki Devi (P.W.1/first informant), Sarvesh (P.W.2/son of the informant), Chandra Bhan (P.W.3/witness of inquest), Awadhesh (P.W.4), Sirnam (P.W.5) and Subhash (P.W.6). It is further submitted that out of the said six witnesses examined, P.W.1, P.W.2, P.W.4 and P.W.5 have not supported the prosecution case and have been declared hostile whereas P.W.3 and P.W.6 have not supported the prosecution case. Copy of the charge sheet and the statements of P.W.2 to 6 have been placed before the Court which are annexed as S.A.-1 and 2 to the Supplementary Affidavit dated 18.3.2025. It is further submitted that the statement of P.W.1 has been placed before the Court which is annexure no.13 to the affidavit in support of bail application. It is argued that looking to the said fact and further fact that all the witnesses of fact have examined, the present case is a good case in which the applicant deserves bail since it is clear that he has been falsely implicated. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 18 of the affidavit and is in jail since 17.3.2021. 6. Per contra learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments as aforesaid. 7. After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the trial in the present matter has started in which six witnesses have been examined out of whom four witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and have been declared hostile and remaining two witnesses have not supported the prosecution case. 8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 9. Let the applicant-Smt. Savitri Devi, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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 prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C. (v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. 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 and the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant. 10. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. 11. The bail application is allowed. 12. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 1.8.2025 Gaurav Kuls Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad