PUSPHA DEVI Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pleadings have already been exchanged between the parties are on the record.

(2.) Heard Shri Suresh Kumar Yadav, the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The applicant, Puspha Devi, has moved the present bail application seeking bail in Case Crime No. 327 of 2018, under Ss. 302, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Mohammadpur Khala, District Barabanki.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that accused applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant was not named in the F.I.R. and she was summoned under Sec. 319 Cr.P.C. on the premise of statements of witnesses, P.W.7, P.W.9 and P.W.10 in the trial court who have maliciously taken the name of applicant with intention to implicate the applicant falsely. The complainant in her statement before the trial court has not taken the name of applicant. As per prosecution case, the main role has been assigned to co-accused Gajraj Singh, who has already been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dtd. 24/4/2019 passed in Bail No.8940 of 2018. One another co-accused, Jaikaran Singh @ Chhoti, who was not named in the F.I.R. and was summoned under Sec. 319 Cr.P.C. has also been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dtd. 26/2/2020 passed in bail No. 10612 of 2020, and the case of applicant is not on the worse footing than that of the co-accused, Jaikaran Singh @ Chhoti, who has been enlarged on bail.