VIJAY LAXMI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Birendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A.for the State of U.P., Sri N.K. Mishra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant and perused the record.

(2.) THIS bail application has been filed by the applicant Vijay Laxmi with a prayer that she may be released on bail in Case Crime No. 1610 of 2009 under section 302 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Mahoba, District Mahoba.

(3.) IT is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is a woman, she has been falsely implicated in the present case only on the basis of the doubt and suspicion, the first informant and other witnesses were not residing in the same house where the alleged occurrence had taken place. According to the FIR itself, they came at the place of occurrence at shouting of the deceased, it shows that they had not seen the alleged incident. There was no dispute between the applicant and the deceased even the husband of the applicant has not purchased the Maruti car in the partner ship of the deceased. The applicant was not present at the alleged place of occurrence. The Maruti Car was in the name of the applicant, it was not in the name of the deceased. The ligature mark of the deceased has not been explained. It shows that in the morning dead body was found thereafter the FIR has been lodged, in fact, the alleged incident was not witnessed by any person. The applicant is not having any criminal antecedent, she may be released on bail.