Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
Yashwanti Alias Aswanti Devi – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sameer Jain, J.
1. Heard Ms. Mary Puncha, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.S. Dubey, learned counsel for the informant and Dr. S.B. Maurya, learned AGA-I, for the State.
2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release her on bail in Case Crime No.366 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 103(1) BNS, Police Station Belipar, District Gorakhpur during pendency of the trial.
3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 23.10.2024 against the applicant and her son, Raj Nishad under Sections 115(2), 352, 351 (3) and 110 BNS and according to the FIR, on 22.10.2024 at about 7.00 PM in the evening without any reason applicant and her son started abusing the son of the informant and when he resisted then they caused injuries to him through sharp edged weapon (sabbal) due to which he sustained injuries and he has been admitted to the Hospital.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that initially FIR of the present case was lodged under Section 115(2), 352, 351(3) and 110 BNS and after the death of the injured, i.e., the son of the informant case has been converted under Section 103 (1) BNS.
5. She further submits that
Bail is a rule, not an exception; an accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty, necessitating specific allegations for denial of bail.
Bail should not be denied for punitive purposes, and the presumption of innocence must be upheld, particularly when evidence does not conclusively link the accused to the crime.
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 emphasized that bail should not be granted if there is a strong likelihood of witness tampering and the accused is charged with a serious offence.
An accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and bail should not be denied without clear evidence of involvement in the alleged crime.
The court granted bail due to lack of evidence linking the applicant to a serious injury, emphasizing the importance of individual circumstances in bail decisions.
Bail may be granted when the applicant is not named in the FIR, lacks a criminal history, and demonstrates willingness to cooperate in trial proceedings.
The court granted bail based on the absence of weapons, lack of witness intimidation, and the delay in trial not attributable to the petitioners.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the principle of presumption of innocence and the right to life and liberty in granting bail to the accused.
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
