# Smt. Rekha Sharma v. State Of U.P - **Citation:** (2016) 4 ILRA 1106 - **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad - **Decided:** 2016-04-01 - **Bench:** Karuna Nand Bajpayee - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/smt-rekha-sharma-v-state-of-u-p-43551 - **Pages:** 5 ## Text 1106 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES Amending Acts under which amendments have been made in original Acts. Once the plant takes root in original Act, an appropriate step is required to be taken by the Legislature. If no action is taken, hundreds and thousands of such Amending Acts continue to remain in statute books. A device is, therefore, adopted by the Legislature to repeal all such Amending Acts, which would repeal only those Acts, i.e. Amending Acts. But such repeal does not affect original Acts which already stood amended." 9. In the judgment of the Supreme Court in Lal Shah Baba Dargah Trust Vs Magnum Developers & Ors3 both the amendment as well as the repealing legislation were taken notice of in paragraph 11. The Supreme Court had issued following directions to the States for compliance: "42. Before parting with the order we record our serious exception to the conduct of the States who have not till date issued fresh notification constituting three member Tribunal as mandate by Section 83 (4) of the Act. We, therefore, direct the States to immediately take steps for constituting a three member Tribunal and notification to that effect must be issued within four months from today." 10. Following these principles, it is clear that once the provisions of the amending legislation, namely, Amending Act 27 of 2013 had been brought into force and the amendments have been incorporated in the provisions of the Waqf Act, 1995, the subsequent repeal of the amending legislation would not affect the amendments which had already been effected. 11. Consequently, we find no merit in the writ petition. The writ petition shall, accordingly, stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. --------- ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 01.04.2016 BEFORE THE HON'BLE KARUNA NAND BAJPAYEE, J. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.- 9050 Of 2016 Smt. Rekha Sharma ...Applicant Versus State Of U.P. ...Opposite Party Counsel for Applicant: Anshu Singh, Hemendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party: G.A. 4 All. Smt. Rekha Sharma Vs State Of U.P. 1107 Proceedings: Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. The applicant, a married woman for two years, sought bail in a case under Sections 147, 148, 149, 504, 307, 302 IPC and 3(2)5 SC/ST Act, alleging her noninvolvement in the homicidal incident. It was submitted that her husband had himself informed the police of the quarrel, and the injured witness did not implicate the applicant in any overt act. Reference was made to a co-accused woman released on similar grounds. The applicant undertook to cooperate with the investigation and to appear before the court as required. Procedure: The Court examined the rival submissions, applying principles of bail in criminal cases, particularly regarding women accused, minor role in offence, and prima facie distinction from main accused. The Court considered the period of detention (almost two years) and pendency of trial while balancing the interests of justice and public safety. Penal Sections: Sections 147, 148, 149, 504, 307, 302 IPC Section 3(2)5 SC/ST Act Case Law: No specific case law cited, but the Court relied on general principles of bail and distinctions based on gender and role in offence. Head Notes: Bail may be granted to an accused woman whose involvement in the alleged crime is prima facie minimal, especially where the main perpetrators are male co-accused. Detention over a prolonged period and lack of direct evidence against the applicant favor bail. Observations made during bail are limited to the application and do not prejudice the merits of the trial. Conditions of bail include personal bond, sureties, noninterference with evidence, and mandatory appearance in court. Facts: Applicant is a married woman for two years. Incident involved quarrel and assault in village leading to deaths. Applicant's husband informed police of incident. Injured witness Kalu @ Pratap did not implicate the applicant in assault. Co-accused woman, pregnant at time of incident, granted bail earlier. Applicant has been in jail since 31.7.2014. Contentions: Applicant: Minimal role in incident; husband informed police; no direct evidence against her; co-accused women released on similar grounds; ready to cooperate and appear in court. Opposite Party: Applicant named in FIR and vicariously liable; three deaths occurred; matter involves public and communal seriousness; strict view needed. 1108 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES Analysis: Prima facie, the applicant's role appears minor compared to male co-accused. No overt act attributed to applicant in witness statement. Applicant being a woman and minor participant distinguishes her from main perpetrators. Long pre-trial detention favors grant of bail. Conditions imposed safeguard prosecution evidence and ensure attendance in court. Bail decision does not reflect on ultimate merits of the case. Conclusion: The Court allowed the bail application of SMT. REKHA SHARMA on execution of personal bond and two sureties. Conditions imposed include non-interference with evidence and mandatory appearance in court. The observations in this order are restricted to the bail application and do not prejudice the trial's outcome. (Delivered by Hon'ble Karuna Nand Bajpayee, J.) 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. 2. Perused the record. 3. Submission of counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is a woman, who was married two years back in the family. Further submission is that after coming to know about the quarrel in the village, she herself had requested her husband Hariom Sharma to inform the police as she apprehended that something untoward might happen. It was further submitted that the applicant's husband himself had dialed number 100 and called up the police. Counsel has drawn the attention of the Court to annexure no. 3 which indicates that Hariom Sharma was the person, who had informed the police that quarrel has taken place in the village. Submission is that if the family members of the applicant might have been on wrong footing then there was no reason for her to make a request to her husband to call up the police, If her own family members are involved in the said incident in question. Further submission is that though according to the version of the F.I.R. the allegation is made that the applicant was armed with lathi or danda but when the injured witness Kalu @ Pratap was examined by the police he has specifically stated that the assault had been made by the co-accused Mulla, Kalu and Balak Ram. The injured witness has not attributed any overt act against the applicant. It was further submitted that though an omnibus generalized statement has been made by the injured-victim that 'Brahmins' accused persons dragged the deceased and the injured to the field and assaulted there by 'farsa', 'danda' and 'sariya' but the same is highly improbable to believe that when several male members variously armed were making assault then why the two women would also participate in the occurrence of this horrible nature and scale. It was also emphasized that another woman-accused who was on her family way and was carrying pregnancy at the time of incident and had subsequently delivered a child also, she has already been released on bail by another bench of this Court on 27.1.2016 on this very ground. Contention is that the applicant being a woman and the daughter-in-law, who was married just two years back, had absolutely no reason to have acted in such a bizarre manner as has been suggested by the prosecution. It has also been emphasized that the conduct of the applicant's husband in informing 4 All. Smt. Rekha Sharma Vs State Of U.P. 1109 the police is also not an innocuous circumstance and has its own implications. Further submission is that because three persons lost their lives in this incident and the incident had assumed a communal or cast complexion, therefore, out of vengeance and ire of the family members of the deceased, even the women folk has not been spared and the applicant has fallen prey to the same vendetta and has been made an accused in this case for the same reason. Submission is that the applicant being a woman and having not been attributed any specific overt role in the statement given by the victim, her case is distinguishable from the other co-accused and therefore, she may be enlarged on bail. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that she is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make herself available before the court whenever required. Much emphasis was laid by the counsel on the period of detention and it has been pointed out that the applicant has spent almost two years in jail and she is languishing behind the bars since 31.7.2014 and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial. 4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that in the F.I.R. the applicant has also been nominated as an accused and is said to have been armed with lathi or danda and because a general attack or assault was made upon the deceased persons by all the accused persons, therefore, the applicant is also vicariously liable for the offence. Further submission is that three persons have lost life in this case, so the matter should be viewed strictly and not liberally. 5. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case in the light of rival submissions made at the bar and specially keeping in view the fact of the applicant is a woman and also keeping in view the dilution of allegation made against her in the statement of the injured witness- Kalu @ Pratap, this Court is of view that the case of the applicant is distinguishable from all the other male accused persons, who appear to have been the principle offenders in this case and, therefore, on a prima facie basis, a case for bail in favour of the applicant is made out. 6. Let the applicant- Smt. Rekha Sharma, involved in Case Crime No. 176 of 2014, u/s 147, 148, 149, 504, 307, 302 I.P.C. and 3(2)5 S.C./S.T. Act, P.S.- Lodha, District- Aligarh, be released on bail on her executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :- (1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever. (2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date in the court and her personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice. 1110 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES 7. It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail. 8. It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case. --------- ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 18.03.2016 BEFORE THE HON'BLE KARUNA NAND BAJPAYEE, J. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.- 11453 Of 2015 Yamin Khan ...Applicant Versus State Of U.P. ...Opposite Party Counsel for the Applicant: Mohit Singh Counsel for the Opposite Party: Govt. Advocate Bail - Section 439 Cr.P.C. - Offence under Sections 326, 352 I.P.C. - Acid attack by son upon father - Heinous nature of offence - Sanctity of relationship - Gravity of offence outweighs period of detention - Bail rejected - Direction for expeditious trial. Sections 326, 352 I.P.C. - Acid attack - Allegation that the applicant threw acid upon his father over a property dispute, causing grievous injuries and impairment of eyesight - Prima facie evidence supported by statement of victim and other witnesses. Gravity and heinous nature of offence - Acid attack constitutes a grave and cruel act - Commission of such offence by a son against his own father violates deeply rooted social and moral norms - Relationship between father and son is sacrosanct and breach thereof aggravates the seriousness of the crime. False implication plea - Extreme provocation - Plea of false implication due to family dispute and provocation is a matter of trial - At the stage of bail, Court must consider nature of accusation and supporting material. Period of detention not sole consideration - Mere incarceration since 26.11.2013 cannot be treated as the sole ground for granting bail in a heinous offence involving extreme cruelty.