Knowledge of impending violence must be demonstrated for conspiracy; mere association does not suffice to deny bail.

ORDER

Rajnish Bhatnagar, J. The present application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C seeking regular bail in case FIR No. 74/2020, registered under Sections 302 /120-B/34 IPC at P.S.Ghazipur.

2. In brief the facts of the case are that on 10.3.2020, an information was received vide DD No. 98 dated 9.3.2020 regarding the admission of one Raj Kumar in LBS Hospital. Investigating Officer, after the receipt of information reached at the abovesaid hospital, and came to know that Raj Kumar had died during the treatment. In the hospital, IO met with one Sonu, brother of the deceased and recorded his statement, on the basis of which, the present FIR was registered.

3. As per the prosecution, about 2 years prior to the date of incident, deceased who was a home tutor and was engaged by the petitioner for teaching her as she was preparing for Central Teachers Eligibility Test, and during this period, the petitioner and the deceased came close to each other and even developed physical relations. It is alleged that this fact came to the knowledge of the husband of the petitioner who tried to persuade the deceased to call off the said relations but the deceased was adamant in continuing the relationship with the petitioner and the deceased even threatened the petitioner that he was having video of her with him with regard to their illicit relationship at Abhay Hotel at Vaishali and if petitioner would not continue with the relations, he would circulate the same. According to the prosecution, in order to make deceased understand the situation, in view of the fact that petitioner was married, and was having two minor children, he was asked to return the video which was made by him. It is alleged that on 9.3.2020 the petitioner had given a call on Mobile No. 8587084806 and asked the deceased to come to Ashirwad Apartment at Flat No. 313 belonging to the co-accused Akash. According to the prosecution, three accused persons namely, Sachin, Akash, Vijay gave beating to him in that apartment in order to get the said video which was allegedly made at Hotel Vaishali by the deceased.

4. According to the prosecution, co-accused Sachin dropped the injured outside the road of Ashirwad Apartment, and thereafter, the deceased, as per the prosecution, called his student Harshit at about 10 pm and informed him about his condition. It is alleged that on hearing this Harshit and his father came to the said place and took the injured to the hospital where the injured Raj Kumar expired.

5. State has filed the status report.

6. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is a lady aged around 32 years having two minor children. It is further submitted that the only allegation against the petitioner is that she made a call to the deceased Raj Kumar at about 4.30 pm asking him to come to the said flat situated at Ashirwad Apartment, and after dropping her to the said place she had gone to the Chemist Shop which was being run by her husband. It is further submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the deceased had made two calls to the petitioner one at 9.20 pm and 9.22 pm which clearly show that petitioner was not present at the spot or at the apartment in question. It is further submitted that petitioner is a lady and mother of two minor kids, and she has no role in the murder of Raj Kumar. It is further submitted that she has only dropped the petitioner near the apartment as her husband wanted to talk to him, and to take back the video of the petitioner and the deceased so that she may not be maligned in the society. It is further submitted that the petitioner was not aware