Back
SAMEER JAIN
Ritu Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Heard Shri Dheeraj Kumar Singh learned counsel for the applicant and Pradeep Kumar, learned AGA for the State-respondent.
2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 282 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, Police Station Paschim Sharira, District Kaushambi, during pendency of the trial in the court below.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was not named in the FIR and during investigation through the statement of co-accused she was made accused in the present matter. He further submits that except the statement of co-accused Jitu Yadav and confessional statement of applicant there is no other cogent evidence against the applicant. He further submits that apart from the present case applicant was also made accused in one another case but in that case she is on bail. He further submits that the applicant is a lady and in the present matter she is in jail since 19.03.2024.
4. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned
The court established that the absence of substantial evidence against an accused, particularly when not named in the FIR, is a significant factor in granting bail.
Bail can be granted for additional charges if the applicant has previously been released on bail and lacks a criminal history.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that an accused may be granted bail based on factors such as not being named in the F.I.R., being arrested on the information of a squealer along w....
The court granted bail based on the applicant's lack of prior criminal history and insufficient evidence against him, emphasizing the rights under Article 21.
The court may grant bail based on the assertion of innocence and lack of dispute from the opposing counsel, without affecting the merits of the case.
The court ruled that the totality of evidence, including the FIR and dying declaration, suggested the applicant's involvement in the crime, justifying the rejection of bail.
The court may consider a compromise between the parties, the payment of the due amount, the period of custody already undergone, and the explanation of the applicant's criminal history as grounds for....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
